Sanders opinion highlights confused nature of transmutation
Posted Tuesday, December 27th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The December 21, 2011 Court of Appeals opinion in Sanders v. Sanders, 396 S.C. 410, 722 S.E.2d 15 (Ct. App. 2011), demonstrates the continuing confused jurisprudence
Posted Monday, December 19th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The first of the fifteen factors set forth in South Carolina Code Section 20-3-620 regarding the division of marital property is “the duration of the
One hundred things I don’t know about South Carolina family law
Posted Monday, November 14th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Attorney's Fees, Child Custody, Child Support, Contempt/Enforcement of Orders, Department of Social Services/Child Abuse and Neglect, Divorce and Marriage, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Family Court Procedure, Jurisprudence, Mediation/Alternative Dispute Resolution, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, Paternity, South Carolina Specific
This blog is inspired by myriad important family law issues that current South Carolina case law and statute don’t adequately answer. None of these questions
Posted Tuesday, November 1st, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Child Support, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
In the October 31, 2011 opinion in Burch v. Burch, 395 S.C. 318, 717 S.E.2d 757 (2011), the South Carolina Supreme Court finally ratifies the passive
Posted Thursday, October 27th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
In August I blogged about an appellate loss by my friend and colleague, Thomas F. McDow, in the case of Pittman v. Pittman. Last week the
Posted Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The August 31, 2011 Court of Appeals opinion in Nestberg v. Nestberg, 394 S.C. 618, 716 S.E.2d 310 (Ct. App. 2011) is the second of two
This is what happens when no one’s a math major
Posted Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The August 31, 2011 Court of Appeals opinion in Barrow v. Barrow, 394 S.C. 603, 716 S.E.2d 302 (Ct. App. 2011) analyzes the issue of “misconduct” in the
Court of Appeals affirms family court on which QDRO plan to use
Posted Thursday, August 11th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
The August 10, 2011 Court of Appeals opinion in Keefer v. Keefer involved a dispute between which of two Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) plans
At least he got the laptop back
Posted Wednesday, August 3rd, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Attorney's Fees, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
N.B., the Court of Appeals opinion in Pittman v. Pittman was subsequently refiled with a different analysis on the transmutation issue. See Rearranging the deck chairs Thomas
Posted Tuesday, May 31st, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Jurisprudence, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys
The May 30, 2011 New York Times reports a story about a husband, a partner at a powerful New York City law firm, attempting to
