Skinner v. Skinner, 19360

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
• Citation: 186 S.E.2d 523,257 S.C. 544
• Decision Date: 20 January 1972
• Docket Number: No. 19360,19360
• Parties: Eugene G. SKINNER, Appellant, v. Martha C. SKINNER, Respondent.

Page 523

186 S.E.2d 523 257 S.C. 544 Eugene G. SKINNER, Appellant,
v.
Martha C. SKINNER, Respondent. No. 19360. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Jan. 20, 1972.

[257 S.C. 545]

Page 524

Paul N. Uricchio, Jr., Charleston, for appellant.

[257 S.C. 546] Henry B. Smythe, of Buist, Moore, Smythe & McGee, Charleston, for respondent.

LEWIS, Justice:

This action was instituted by the appellant, Eugene G. Skinner, against the respondent, his wife, for a divorce and confirmation of a property settlement and agreement as to child support and alimony. A final decree was entered by the presiding judge of the Ninth Circuit granting the relief sought by the husband. Subsequently, under a motion filed by the wife, the presiding judge vacated and set aside his first decree and, upon materially different factual findings, entered a second decree in which the alimony and child support payments were substantially increased. This appeal by the husband challenges the authority of the presiding judge, [257 S.C. 547] under the motion before him, to vacate and set aside his first decree.

The parties to this action were married on January 26, 1947 and have three children. After extended marital difficulties, the parties separated on December 25, 1964 and, admittedly, have continuously lived separate and apart since that time. Thereafter, on October 9, 1967, they entered into a written property settlement agreement which also contained provisions of the payment by the husband of $250.00 per month, as alimony, and $300.00 per month support for the three children. One of the children has since become emancipated and support for only two of them is presently involved. The above agreement was apparently the basis for the husband's contributions to the wife for alimony and child support until the institution of the present action.

Page 525

Subsequently, the husband instituted this action on May 14, 1969, for a divorce on the ground that the parties had been continuously separated for more than three years without cohabitation, and also sought confirmation of the foregoing property settlement and agreement as to alimony and support for the minor children. The answer of the wife asked that the above agreement be set aside upon the ground that she had signed it under duress, and that the court award a reasonable amount for alimony and child support independently of the property settlement and agreement. A cross-action was also filed by her for a divorce from the husband on the ground of desertion.

After hearing exceptions to the report of the master, to whom the issues were referred, the presiding judge entered a decree, dated October 22, 1970, in which he upheld the property settlement and agreement for child support and alimony; awarded a divorce upon the ground that the parties had been continuously separated for three years without...