Bolding v. Bolding, 0320
| Decision Date | 19 September 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 0320,0320 |
| Citation | 323 S.E.2d 535,283 S.C. 501 |
| Court | South Carolina Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Debra Crumpton BOLDING, Respondent, v. Derrill Jake BOLDING, Appellant. . Heard |
Timothy L. Brown, Greenville, for appellant.
William C. Hood, Anderson, for respondent.
Derrill Jake Bolding appeals an order of the family court granting his wife Debra Crumpton Bolding a divorce, custody of the parties' minor children, child support, attorney's fees, and equitable division of the parties' personal property. In its order, however, the family court reserved jurisdiction concerning the issue as to the equitable division of the parties' real property.
Because the order appealed from is not final in that it does not "finally dispose of the whole subject matter in litigation" [4 Am.Jur.2d Appeal and Error § 53 at 575 (1962) ], we dismiss the husband's appeal "for lack of appealability." Id. § 50 at 573.
We might add that we find no merit to the husband's assertion that the wife neglected to plead for a determination of her equitable interest in the real property. The wife in paragraph V of her petition expressly alleges that she is entitled to a "property settlement ... based upon [the parties'] legal and equitable rights" and in her prayer for relief she asks for "a property settlement." See Kirven v. Lawrence, 244 S.C. 572, 137 S.E.2d 764 (1964).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hunnicutt v. Hunnicutt
... ... Bass , 272 S.C ... 177, 249 S.E.2d 905 (1978); Bolding v. Bolding , 283 ... S.C. 501, 323 S.E.2d 535 (Ct. App. 1984); Bryan v ... Bryan , ... ...
-
Wieters v. Bon-Secours-St. Francis
...rule, only final judgments are appealable. Culbertson v. Clemens, 322 S.C. 20, 23, 471 S.E.2d 163, 164 (1996); Bolding v. Bolding, 283 S.C. 501, 323 S.E.2d 535 (Ct.App.1984). "Any judgment or decree, leaving some further act to be done by the court before the rights of the parties are deter......
-
South Carolina Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Mary C.
...court. Generally, an order that leaves some further act to be accomplished is considered interlocutory. See Bolding v. Bolding, 283 S.C. 501, 502, 323 S.E.2d 535, 536 (Ct.App.1984) (dismissing appeal when order appealed from did not finally dispose of the whole subject matter in litigation)......
-
Sexton v. Sexton
...1988 order was not immediately appealable because it did not dispose of the whole subject matter in litigation. Bolding v. Bolding, 283 S.C. 501, 323 S.E.2d 535 (Ct.App.1984). The husband next asserts the trial court erred in adopting findings and rulings from a temporary order in establish......