Hyde v. Hyde, 1506

• Decision Date: 09 April 1990
• Docket Number: No. 1506,1506
• Citation: 302 S.C. 280,395 S.E.2d 186
• Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
• Parties: Ann Theresa HYDE, Respondent, v. Jules Verne HYDE, Appellant. . Heard

Page 186

395 S.E.2d 186

302 S.C. 280

Ann Theresa HYDE, Respondent, v. Jules Verne HYDE, Appellant.

No. 1506.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard April 9, 1990.

Decided May 29, 1990.

K. Douglas Thornton, of Coffey, Cooper, Chandler & Durant, Surfside Beach, for appellant.

H.T. Abbott, III, Conway, for respondent.

Joseph O. Burroughs, Jr., Conway, GAL for minor child.

SHAW, Judge:

Respondent-wife, Ann Theresa Hyde, sued appellant-husband , Jules Verne Hyde, for, among other things, a divorce, equitable distribution of marital property, and custody of the minor child of the parties. From a family court order, the husband appeals the provisions on visitation and property division. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.

At the time of the hearing on this matter, the husband was 65 years old, the wife was 50 and their son was 9. The parties had been married for approximately 11 years. The trial judge granted the wife a divorce on the ground of physical cruelty, awarded custody of the minor child to the wife, ordered the husband was to have six hours of visitation per month and equitably divided the marital property.

The husband first contends the trial judge erred in limiting his visitation to only six hours per month. We disagree. The issue of visitation is within the sound discretion of the trial judge and his findings will not be disturbed absent an abuse of that discretion. Cudd v. Arline, 277 S.C. 236, 285 S.E.2d 881 (1981). As with child custody, the paramount and controlling consideration of the court in determining the issue of visitation is the welfare and best interest of the child. King v. Gardner, 274 S.C. 493, 265 S.E.2d 260 (1980). Indeed, while it is to be used sparingly, the court has the power to absolutely forbid visitation in an extreme case. Venable v. Venable, 273 S.C. 96, 254 S.E.2d 309 (1979).

The record before us is replete with evidence of the husband's irrational rage and uncontrollable temper. The wife testified to at least three incidents of physical abuse and threats committed on her by the husband which were corroborated by witnesses or admitted to by the husband. She further testified on one occasion the husband had pulled their son's hair when he was small because the child would not say he loved the husband. She also testified the husband verbally abused another child who was on an outing with the family, reducing the child to tears, and, after dropping the child off and returning home, he physically abused the mother, stopping only when their son became hysterical. Finally, the record reveals that subsequent to the...