Smith v. Smith, No. 21347

CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtNESS; LEWIS
Citation272 S.E.2d 797,275 S.C. 494
Decision Date08 December 1980
Docket NumberNo. 21347
PartiesRobert SMITH, Appellant, v. Inez SMITH, Respondent.

Page 797

272 S.E.2d 797
275 S.C. 494
Robert SMITH, Appellant,
v.
Inez SMITH, Respondent.
No. 21347.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
Dec. 8, 1980.

Page 798

[275 S.C. 495] Andrew M. Jones, Jr., of Mitchell & Jones, Greenville, for appellant.

James J. Raman, Spartanburg, for respondent.

[275 S.C. 496] NESS, Justice:

This involves modifying a support decree. Appellant Robert Smith was ordered to pay his child's medical bills of $951.00 and an increase in child support to $35.00 per week due to a change in circumstances. We affirm.

Appellant first asserts the family court erred in refusing to dismiss the action because respondent Inez Smith commenced the proceeding by motions rather than by summons and petition.

There is no indication in the transcript of record that the lower court ruled on this question. An issue may not be raised for the first time on appeal. State v. McDaniel, S.C., 268 S.E.2d 585 (1980).

Moreover, appellant presented testimony which would constitute a general appearance and waiver of any jurisdictional defect. See Nocher v. Nocher, 268 S.C. 503, 234 S.E.2d 884 (1977).

Appellant next asserts the trial court erred by requiring him to pay the medical bills. We disagree.

The issue is whether extraordinary medical expenses of a child constitutes a change of circumstances warranting modification of a prior support decree.

We conclude a change of circumstances warranting modification of a prior divorce decree may be shown by extraordinary medical expenses when they were not dealt with in the original decree. Witt v. Witt, 271 S.C. 541, 248 S.E.2d 494 (1978); Moesley v. Moesley, 263 S.C. 1, 207 S.E.2d 403 (1974); also see cases collected at 27B C.J.S. Divorce § 322(2) (1959).

Here, the medical expenses were incurred for an injury to appellant's child's knee. The trial judge found this to be a change in circumstances which warranted modification of [275 S.C. 497] the existing support decree, and ordered the appellant to pay the $951.00 medical bill. Witt v. Witt, supra.

Child support is always modifiable upon proper showing of a change in either the child's needs or the supporting parents financial ability. Cason v. Cason, 271 S.C. 393, 247 S.E.2d 673 (1978); Campbell v. McPherson, 268 S.C. 444, 234 S.E.2d 774 (1977). The amount awarded is within the sound discretion of the trial judge, and his ruling will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. Smith v. Smith, 264 S.C. 624, 216 S.E.2d 541 (1975).

Appellant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 practice notes
  • Riggs v. Riggs, No. 25598.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • February 24, 2003
    ...Husband's remaining issues are without merit and we dispose of them pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR. See Issue IV: Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980); Hatfield v. Hatfield, 327 S.C. 360, 489 S.E.2d 212 (Ct.App.1997) (issue must be raised to and ruled on by family court to be......
  • Bakala v. Bakala, No. 25586.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • January 27, 2003
    ...compliance with the Hague Service Convention was never raised to the family court. Accordingly, we decline to address it. Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980) (issue not raised to family court not preserved for review on Similarly, Husband raises for the first time on appeal ......
  • Calvert v. Calvert, No. 0578
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • October 23, 1985
    ...modifiable upon a proper showing of a change in either the child's needs or the supporting parent's financial ability. Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980), S.C. Code of Laws § 20-3-160 (1976); see 24 Am.Jur.2d Divorce and Separation § 844 at 958 (1966). But whether the famil......
  • Petition of White, No. 1393
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • June 13, 1989
    ...support upon a proper showing of a change in the supported child's needs or the supporting parent's financial ability. Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980); Calvert v. Calvert, 287 S.C. 130, 336 S.E.2d 884 (Ct.App.1985). The father has not convinced me that his financial cond......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
20 cases
  • Riggs v. Riggs, No. 25598.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • February 24, 2003
    ...Husband's remaining issues are without merit and we dispose of them pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR. See Issue IV: Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980); Hatfield v. Hatfield, 327 S.C. 360, 489 S.E.2d 212 (Ct.App.1997) (issue must be raised to and ruled on by family court to be......
  • Bakala v. Bakala, No. 25586.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • January 27, 2003
    ...compliance with the Hague Service Convention was never raised to the family court. Accordingly, we decline to address it. Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980) (issue not raised to family court not preserved for review on Similarly, Husband raises for the first time on appeal ......
  • Calvert v. Calvert, No. 0578
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • October 23, 1985
    ...modifiable upon a proper showing of a change in either the child's needs or the supporting parent's financial ability. Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980), S.C. Code of Laws § 20-3-160 (1976); see 24 Am.Jur.2d Divorce and Separation § 844 at 958 (1966). But whether the famil......
  • Petition of White, No. 1393
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • June 13, 1989
    ...support upon a proper showing of a change in the supported child's needs or the supporting parent's financial ability. Smith v. Smith, 275 S.C. 494, 272 S.E.2d 797 (1980); Calvert v. Calvert, 287 S.C. 130, 336 S.E.2d 884 (Ct.App.1985). The father has not convinced me that his financial cond......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT