Posted Wednesday, April 26th, 2023 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Child Custody, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
In the April 26, 2023, opinion in Greene v. Greene, 439 S.C. 427, 887 S.E.2d 157 (Ct.App. 2023), finding exceptional circumstances, the Court of Appeals
In contested custody litigation, there’s no downside to kindness
Posted Saturday, March 4th, 2023 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys
One of the quickest, easiest, and most effective “fixes” I can counsel my clients to do in contested custody litigation is to be kind to
In a dysfunctional parenting relationship, there’s better than even odds that you’re the problem
Posted Saturday, March 4th, 2023 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney-Client Relations, Child Custody, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
Most of my contested custody litigation, especially those requiring trial, involve parents in a dysfunctional co-parenting relationship. The inability of these parents to get along
Many reasons to love Our Family Wizard
Posted Friday, February 17th, 2023 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants
When I first started trying custody cases in 1994, there were no text messages or emails and the World Wide Web was in its infancy.
Court of Appeals reverses family court’s modification of joint custody
Posted Tuesday, February 14th, 2023 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The February 10, 2023, Court of Appeals opinion in Grungo-Smith v. Grungo, 438 S.C. 508, 884 S.E.2d 219 (Ct. App. 2023), reversed the family court’s
Praising the other parent in a custody trial
Posted Saturday, February 11th, 2023 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Litigation Strategy, Miscellaneous, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys
The past few years I begun a practice of having my custody clients develop a few solid minutes of testimony praising the other parent. Such
The family court’s failure to protect guardians ad litem does not appear to be improving
Posted Tuesday, January 31st, 2023 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Family Court Procedure, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
Over a decade ago I stopped doing guardian ad Litem work and blogged about why. I was tired of ad hominem attacks from unhappy litigants—and
Supreme Court remands for new custody trial based on stale record
Posted Wednesday, November 23rd, 2022 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Appellate Procedure, Child Custody, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
On November 23, 2022, the South Carolina Supreme Court partially granted a writ of certiorari, and remanded the case of Rossington v. Rossington, 438 S.C.
How to get 50/50 physical custody when you don’t have custody (and why it’s unlikely to happen)
Posted Friday, August 26th, 2022 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
A significant number of potential custody clients come to my office with the goal of 50/50 physical custody. Often these are fathers who are not
Little known case has big impact on custody jurisdiction
Posted Friday, August 12th, 2022 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Jurisdiction, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
Occasionally I blog on little known cases that I find myself referencing often. Thus today’s blog about Widdicombe v. Tucker-Cales, 366 S.C. 75, 620 S.E.2d 333
