Miller v. Miller, 22047
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | GREGORY; LEWIS |
| Citation | 313 S.E.2d 288,280 S.C. 314 |
| Parties | Robert C. MILLER, Respondent, v. Jewel L. MILLER, Appellant. |
| Docket Number | No. 22047,22047 |
| Decision Date | 22 February 1984 |
Page 288
v.
Jewel L. MILLER, Appellant.
Decided Feb. 22, 1984.
Page 289
[280 S.C. 315] William I. Bouton, Greenville, for appellant.
Robert C. Miller, for respondent.
GREGORY, Justice:
Respondent Robert C. Miller brought this action for divorce on the ground of adultery. Appellant Jewel L. Miller counterclaimed seeking separate maintenance, enforcement of a separation agreement executed by the parties prior to the filing for divorce, and attorney's fees. The trial judge granted respondent a divorce on the ground of adultery, found he lacked jurisdiction to consider the matters raised in the separation agreement, and found appellant's adultery barred alimony and attorney's fees. We reverse and remand.
Appellant first argues the trial judge erred in failing to assert jurisdiction over the issues of child support, child custody, and property which were contained in the separation agreement executed by the parties.
Litigants are encouraged to reach an extra-judicial agreement on issues arising out of the marital relationship; however, even a plain, unambiguous agreement is subject to the duty of the Family Court to rule upon its fairness. McKinney v. McKinney, 274 S.C. 95, 261 S.E.2d 526 (1980). Moreover, the Family Court has continuing jurisdiction to do whatever is in the child's best interest regardless of what the separation agreement specifies. Moseley v. Mosier, S.C., 306 S.E.2d 624 (1983). The trial judge erred in finding the court without jurisdiction over the issues contained in the separation agreement.
Appellant next argues the trial judge erred in failing to grant temporary child support during the pendency of the action. S.C.Code Ann. § 20-3-160 (1976) provides, [280 S.C. 316] "In any action for divorce from the bonds of matrimony the court may at any stage of the cause ... make such orders touching the care, custody and maintenance of the children of the marriage and what, if any, security shall be given for the same as from the circumstances of the parties and the nature of the case and the best spiritual as well as other interests of the children may be fit, equitable and just." We hold the trial judge
Page 290
erred in failing to consider appellant's request for child support during the pendency of the action.Next, appellant argues the judge erred in failing to conduct a reconciliation hearing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Landry v. Landry, Appellate Case No. 2019-000843
...court's obligation to review the fairness of an agreement includes a duty to examine plain, unambiguous agreements. Miller v. Miller , 280 S.C. 314, 315, 313 S.E.2d 288, 289 (1984). Ambiguous agreements, however, require the family court to determine the intent of the parties before making ......
-
Garris v. McDuffie, No. 0706
...Gay v. Gay, 288 S.C. 74, 339 S.E.2d 532, 534 (Ct.App.1986). The trial judge also has authority to award costs. See Miller v. Miller, 280 S.C. 314, 313 S.E.2d 288, 290 In making an award of attorney's fees the family court should consider and make appropriate findings concerning: (1) the nat......
-
Petition of White, No. 1393
...of a child to do so regardless of the agreement's provisions. Moseley v. Mosier, 279 S.C. 348, 306 S.E.2d 624 (1983); Miller v. Miller, 280 S.C. 314, 313 S.E.2d 288 (1984); Small v. Small, 286 S.C. 87, 332 S.E.2d 769 (1985); Ratchford v. Ratchford, 295 S.C. 297, 368 S.E.2d 214 (Ct.App.1988)......
-
Anderson v. Tolbert, 2530
...Edwards v. Harris, 279 S.C. 189, 304 S.E.2d 638 (1983); Edens v. Edens, 273 S.C. 303, 255 S.E.2d 856 (1979). In Miller v. Miller, 280 S.C. 314, 313 S.E.2d 288 (1984), the Court held a wife's mere assertion that she had no funds with which to pay her attorney was insufficient justification f......
-
Landry v. Landry, Appellate Case No. 2019-000843
...court's obligation to review the fairness of an agreement includes a duty to examine plain, unambiguous agreements. Miller v. Miller , 280 S.C. 314, 315, 313 S.E.2d 288, 289 (1984). Ambiguous agreements, however, require the family court to determine the intent of the parties before making ......
-
Garris v. McDuffie, No. 0706
...Gay v. Gay, 288 S.C. 74, 339 S.E.2d 532, 534 (Ct.App.1986). The trial judge also has authority to award costs. See Miller v. Miller, 280 S.C. 314, 313 S.E.2d 288, 290 In making an award of attorney's fees the family court should consider and make appropriate findings concerning: (1) the nat......
-
Petition of White, No. 1393
...of a child to do so regardless of the agreement's provisions. Moseley v. Mosier, 279 S.C. 348, 306 S.E.2d 624 (1983); Miller v. Miller, 280 S.C. 314, 313 S.E.2d 288 (1984); Small v. Small, 286 S.C. 87, 332 S.E.2d 769 (1985); Ratchford v. Ratchford, 295 S.C. 297, 368 S.E.2d 214 (Ct.App.1988)......
-
Anderson v. Tolbert, 2530
...Edwards v. Harris, 279 S.C. 189, 304 S.E.2d 638 (1983); Edens v. Edens, 273 S.C. 303, 255 S.E.2d 856 (1979). In Miller v. Miller, 280 S.C. 314, 313 S.E.2d 288 (1984), the Court held a wife's mere assertion that she had no funds with which to pay her attorney was insufficient justification f......