Grubbs v. Grubbs, 20821
| Decision Date | 28 November 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 20821,20821 |
| Citation | 249 S.E.2d 747,272 S.C. 138 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Margaret Elizabeth GRUBBS, Appellant, v. Charles Andrew GRUBBS, Respondent. |
J. D. Todd, Jr., of Leatherwood, Walker, Todd & Mann, Greenville, for appellant.
Rex L. Carter, of Carter, Philpot, Johnson & Smith, and David D. Armstrong, Greenville, for respondent.
The Family Court denied both parties a divorce, awarded the wife certain relief, but held her barred from receiving alimony due to improper conduct some eleven years ago. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The appellant wife sought a divorce from respondent on the grounds of physical cruelty and/or adultery. Mr. Grubbs counterclaimed for a divorce on the grounds of habitual drunkenness or habitual use of drugs and/or adultery. Both parties sought custody of the three children.
While concluding that neither party was entitled to a divorce, the lower court granted them a legal separation, and awarded custody of the daughter to the wife and custody of the two boys to the husband. The wife was granted child support of $592 per month, plus the expenses of the daughter at private school. The $592 award consists of $300 per month actual support for the daughter and $292 a month for mortgage payments on the home in which mother and daughter reside.
The trial judge found the wife guilty of adulterous conduct and, pursuant to Code § 20-3-130 (1976), denied her request for alimony. However, the court concluded the wife was entitled to the sum of $65,000 as payment for services she rendered to the parties' business, Ye Olde Fireplace, a Greenville restaurant.
The appellant wife asserts the trial court erred in holding her barred from receiving alimony because of her one incident of adultery some eleven years earlier. We concur.
While Mrs. Grubbs admitted committing a single indiscretion in 1966, this should not prevent her from receiving alimony. The parties continued to live together for over ten years following the offense. Despite the husband's assertion that he only recently discovered Mrs. Grubbs' prior adulterous conduct, we believe the preponderance of the evidence indicates he condoned her isolated act of infidelity.
" Condonation in the law of divorce means forgiveness, express or implied, by one spouse for a breach of marital duty by the other." 27A C.J.S. Divorce § 59, p. 194. While knowledge of the offense by the forgiving spouse is one of the critical factors establishing condonation, knowledge may be presumed in some instances. According to 24 Am.Jur.2d, Divorce and Separation, § 209, p. 365:
"One of the essential elements of condonation is the forgiving spouse's knowledge, Either actual or presumed, of the offense alleged to have been forgiven or condoned." (Emphasis supplied).
In McLaughlin v. McLaughlin, 244 S.C. 265, 274, 136 S.E.2d 537, 541 (1964), the Court quoted with approval the following language from 27A C.J.S. Divorce § 123(9), p. 423:
"Condonation may be presumed from cohabitation; and lapse of time, or a continuance of marital cohabitation with knowledge of the offense, raises a presumption of condonation."
The husband's bare assertion that he did not learn of his wife's affair until over ten years after it occurred is insufficient to rebut the presumption of condonation arising from the lapse of time, the cohabitation of the parties, and other related conduct by the husband. We reverse that portion of the trial court's order holding the wife barred from receiving alimony, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Smith
...(Supp.1981). The requirement that the supporting party make mortgage payments may be an incident of support. See Grubbs v. Grubbs, 272 S.C. 138, 249 S.E.2d 747 (1978); Mays v. Mays, 267 S.C. 490, 229 S.E.2d 725 (1976). A party who is granted possession of a residence as an incident of suppo......
-
Srivastava v. Srivastava
...the couple continued to cohabitate and voluntarily engage in sexual relations for approximately five months); Grubbs v. Grubbs, 272 S.C. 138, 141, 249 S.E.2d 747, 749 (1978) (finding the husband's assertion that he did not learn of his wife's affair until over ten years after it occurred wa......
-
Atkinson v. Atkinson, 0003
...of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) for certain expenses incurred by her that the appellant had been ordered to pay. See Grubbs v. Grubbs, 272 S.C. 138, 249 S.E.2d 747 (1978). On remand, the lower court shall set forth in its order each salient fact found by it to support the court's conclusio......
-
Doe v. Doe, 0550
...law of divorce means forgiveness, express or implied, by one spouse for a breach of marital duty by the other. Grubbs v. Grubbs, 272 S.C. 138, 140, 249 S.E.2d 747, 749 (1978). Condonation may be presumed from cohabitation; and lapse of time, or a continuance of marital cohabitation with kno......