Lunsford v. Lunsford, 21575
Decision Date | 28 September 1981 |
Docket Number | No. 21575,21575 |
Citation | 282 S.E.2d 861,277 S.C. 104 |
Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Parties | Sue Humberson LUNSFORD and Michael R. Deddish, Jr., Guardian ad Litem, Appellants, v. Danny Len LUNSFORD, Respondent. |
Walter S. Ameika, North Charleston, for appellants.
Danny Len Lunsford, pro se.
The wife and guardian ad litem appeal the order of the family court denying child support payments. We affirm.
When the Lunsfords were divorced in 1974, a settlement agreement was incorporated into the decree releasing the husband from support payments for the couple's two minor children. After obtaining the appointment of a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of the children, this petition for child support was filed in 1979. Following a hearing, the family court judge issued an order denying child support. This appeal followed.
The first issue is whether either parent can agree to release the other from child support obligations. We hold they cannot.
A parent is under a legal obligation to support minor children, and this obligation continues after a divorce. McLeod v. Sandy Island Corp., 265 S.C. 1, 216 S.E.2d 746 (1975); Lee v. Lee, 237 S.C. 532, 118 S.E.2d 171 (1961); Campbell v. Campbell, 200 S.C. 67, 20 S.E.2d 237 (1942). No agreement can prejudice the rights of children. Johnson v. Johnson, 251 S.C. 420, 163 S.E.2d 229 (1968). More specifically, the basic right of minor children to support is not affected by an agreement between the parents or third parties as to such support. 27B, C.J.S. Divorce § 319(4), p. 606 (1959); 24 Am.Jur.2d, Divorce § 845, p. 958 (1966); Armour v. Allen, 377 So.2d 798 (Fla.App.1979).
Since the support obligation was not extinguished by agreement of the parents, we must confront the next question of whether the denial of support in this particular case was error.
The wife's (custodial parent's) income has more than doubled since the divorce, while the husband's salary has remained the same. She is making over Twenty Thousand ($20,000) Dollars per year compared to his Ten Thousand ($10,000) Dollars. The husband has remarried. The standard of living of the wife and the children is considerably better than that of the husband. Their standard of living has improved since the divorce but his has declined. The wife has the financial ability to adequately meet the needs of the children at the present time. The husband is financially strapped.
In short, the record reflects that the wife is in a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kosciusko v. Parham
...separation agreement specifies." Moseley v. Mosier , 279 S.C. 348, 351, 306 S.E.2d 624, 626 (1983) ; see also Lunsford v. Lunsford , 277 S.C. 104, 105, 282 S.E.2d 861, 862 (1981) ("No agreement can prejudice the rights of children."). This court clarified the holding in Moseley by stating "......
-
Bauckman v. McLeod
...children to support is not affected by an agreement between the parents or third parties as to such support." Lunsford v. Lunsford , 277 S.C. 104, 105, 282 S.E.2d 861, 862 (1981) (citation omitted); see also 67A C.J.S. Parent and Child § 184, Westlaw (database updated December 2019) ("An ag......
-
SCDSS/Child Support Enforcement v. Carswell
...impose a new obligation because a parent's support obligation arises at the birth of a child. See generally Lunsford v. Lunsford, 277 S.C. 104, 104, 282 S.E.2d 861, 862 (1981) (finding a parent has a legal obligation to support a minor child); Campbell v. Campbell, 200 S.C. 67, 72, 20 S.E.2......
-
Peebles v. Disher, 0029
...of whether the mother has sufficient assets to assume the father's duty of support. We believe that the holding in Lunsford v. Lunsford, 277 S.C. 104, 282 S.E.2d 861 (1981), dictates the result reached by us. In that case, a settlement agreement, which was subsequently incorporated into a d......