Financial declarations with an eye toward the future
Posted Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Support, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
Just the past week I have closed a support modification case in which a party’s financial declaration understates that party’s projected future income and taken
Posted Friday, May 28th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Divorce and Marriage, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
A couple of interesting things are happening in yesterday’s Court of Appeals opinion in Bodkin v. Bodkin, 388 S.C. 203, 694 S.E.2d 230 (2010), which, with one
Court of Appeals clarifies what is proof of physical cruelty and what isn’t proof of adultery
Posted Wednesday, April 14th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Divorce and Marriage, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
I have had a number of cases in which a spouse (in my experience, always the husband) has destroyed the home phone in the midst
Was it a mistake to prevent immediate appellate review of temporary family court orders?
Posted Thursday, March 11th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Custody, Child Support, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
It is extremely difficult to get family court temporary orders modified merely upon a claim that the order issued was unfair, based upon inaccurate information,
Posted Thursday, March 4th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Law and Culture, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Specific
Trying (unsuccessfully) to locate a case referenced by Professor Roy T. Stuckey dealing with connivance from the days before South Carolina allowed divorce (1949-50), I
The culture’s misconceptions about condonation
Posted Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Divorce and Marriage, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
Condonation (a legal term meaning “conditional forgiveness”) is a powerful defense to a fault divorce in South Carolina. If proven, condonation revives an alimony claim
Posted Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Divorce and Marriage, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Specific
Professor Roy T. Stuckey’s excellent guidebook, Marital Litigation in South Carolina: Substantive Law (3rd. Ed), has little use for the defense of connivance, concluding its
The perils of inaccurate (or no) financial declarations in family court
Posted Thursday, February 25th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Support, Family Court Procedure, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
For any family court trial involving alimony or attorney’s fees, and for most trials involving child support or support enforcement, an accurate financial declaration is
South Carolina’s alimony lottery
Posted Friday, February 19th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Specific
I had a recent phone conference with a New Jersey attorney as we discussed the advantages of disadvantages of fighting an alimony case in South
Posted Monday, January 11th, 2010 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
Today’s Supreme Court opinion in Dickert v. Dickert, 387 S.C. 1, 691 S.E.2d 448 (2010), resolved interesting issues of equitable distribution and alimony. However on the
