Toler v. Toler, No. 0956

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtBELL
Citation292 S.C. 374,356 S.E.2d 429
PartiesRalph Alvin TOLER, Respondent, v. Kathryn Lewis TOLER, Appellant. . Heard
Docket NumberNo. 0956
Decision Date19 February 1987

Page 429

356 S.E.2d 429
292 S.C. 374
Ralph Alvin TOLER, Respondent,
v.
Kathryn Lewis TOLER, Appellant.
No. 0956.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina.
Heard Feb. 19, 1987.
Decided May 11, 1987.

Page 430

[292 S.C. 376] Randall M. Chastain, of Columbia, for appellant.

J. Leeds Barroll, IV, of Columbia, and George W. Gregory, Jr., of Cheraw, for respondent.

BELL, Judge:

Ralph Alvin Toler petitioned the family court for a divorce from his wife, Kathryn Lewis Toler, on the ground of one year's continuous separation without cohabitation. Both parties sought equitable distribution of the marital estate. In addition, the wife sought permanent periodic alimony. The court granted the divorce, awarded the wife two years of rehabilitative alimony, and distributed the marital estate. The wife appeals the alimony award and the

Page 431

equitable distribution. We vacate in part and remand.

The parties were married on July 28, 1962. They separated in August 1984. At the time of the hearing, both were forty-two years old and in good health. Two children, who are now emancipated, were born of the marriage.

The husband worked as a blue collar wage earner during most of the marriage. He is skilled in a number of trades. At the time of trial, he was farming, teaching part time at a technical college, and serving as a master sergeant in the Air Force Reserve. He earns approximately $814 a month [292 S.C. 377] against monthly expenses of $1,230. The husband is capable of earning more money, but he has been unable to find steady employment in Chesterfield County.

The wife graduated from high school. Before the marriage, she was a clerical worker. She was enrolled in business school at the time of the marriage, but dropped out and did not graduate. She engaged in no significant wage earning employment during the marriage, instead working as a homemaker and mother. Since the separation, she has worked as a part time cashier at an insurance agency, earning about $206 a month against monthly expenses she estimates at $1,335. She has some secretarial skills, including shorthand. She wishes to return to school for additional training so she can become self sufficient.

I.

After reciting that the living expenses of both parties exceed their incomes and that it would be to the wife's advantage to advance educationally, the family court found the husband should pay the wife rehabilitative alimony of $300 a month for twenty-four months. The order contains no other findings supporting the award of rehabilitative alimony.

The purpose of rehabilitative alimony is to encourage a dependent spouse to become self supporting after a divorce. Eagerton v. Eagerton, 285 S.C. 279, 328 S.E.2d 912 (Ct.App.1985). It permits a couple, where all reasons for maintaining the marriage have ended and a divorce is granted, to develop their own lives free from obligations to each other. Id. If a spouse has been out of the job market performing spousal duties over the course of a lengthy marriage, permanent periodic alimony ordinarily will be required and rehabilitative alimony should be approved only in exceptional circumstances. Id. The factors to be considered in awarding rehabilitative alimony include: (1) the duration of the marriage; (2) the age, health, and education of the supported spouse; (3) the financial resources of the parties; (4) the parties' accustomed standards of living; (5) the ability of the supporting spouse to meet his needs while meeting those of the supported spouse; (6) the time necessary for the supported spouse to acquire job training[292 S.C. 378] or skills; (7) the likelihood that the supported spouse will successfully complete retraining; and (8) the supported spouse's likelihood of success in the job market. Id. An award of rehabilitative alimony must be supported by evidence that demonstrates the self sufficiency of the supported spouse at the expiration of the ordered payments. Herring v. Herring, 286 S.C. 477, 335 S.E.2d 366 (1985).

The family court in this case failed to make...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 practice notes
  • Calhoun v. Calhoun, No. 2793.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • February 17, 1998
    ...Noll v. Noll, 297 S.C. 190, 375 S.E.2d 338 (Ct.App.1988); Johnson v. Johnson, 296 S.C. 289, 372 S.E.2d 107 (Ct.App.1988); Toler v. Toler, 292 S.C. 374, 356 S.E.2d 429 (Ct.App.1987); see also S.C.Code Ann. § 20-7-472 The family court found that the actual value of the marital home at the tim......
  • Bojilov v. Bojilov, Appellate Case No. 2015-000991
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • September 19, 2018
    ...to which [the inheriting party] is equitably entitled upon distribution." 425 S.C. 184(alterations in original) (quoting Toler v. Toler , 292 S.C. 374, 380 n.1, 356 S.E.2d 429, 432 n.1 (Ct. App. 1987) ) ); id. (overruling Cooksey v. Cooksey , 280 S.C. 347, 312 S.E.2d 581 (Ct. App. 1984), to......
  • Johnson v. Johnson, No. 1212
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • March 14, 1988
    ...(4) provide for an equitable division of the marital estate, including the manner in which distribution is to take place. Toler v. Toler, 292 S.C. 374, 356 S.E.2d[296 S.C. 294] 429 (Ct.App.1987); Gibson v. Gibson, 283 S.C. 318, 322 S.E.2d 680 Identification of marital property is controlled......
  • Burdeshaw v. Burdeshaw, 2020-UP-105
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • April 8, 2020
    ...into marital property), abrogated on other grounds by Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 384-86, 708 S.E.2d 650, 651-52 (2011); Toler v. Toler, 292 S.C. 374, 380, 356 S.E.2d 429, 432 (Ct. App. 1987) (holding that the proceeds from the sale of the husband's inherited property lost their nonmarita......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
28 cases
  • Calhoun v. Calhoun, No. 2793.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • February 17, 1998
    ...Noll v. Noll, 297 S.C. 190, 375 S.E.2d 338 (Ct.App.1988); Johnson v. Johnson, 296 S.C. 289, 372 S.E.2d 107 (Ct.App.1988); Toler v. Toler, 292 S.C. 374, 356 S.E.2d 429 (Ct.App.1987); see also S.C.Code Ann. § 20-7-472 The family court found that the actual value of the marital home at the tim......
  • Bojilov v. Bojilov, Appellate Case No. 2015-000991
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • September 19, 2018
    ...to which [the inheriting party] is equitably entitled upon distribution." 425 S.C. 184(alterations in original) (quoting Toler v. Toler , 292 S.C. 374, 380 n.1, 356 S.E.2d 429, 432 n.1 (Ct. App. 1987) ) ); id. (overruling Cooksey v. Cooksey , 280 S.C. 347, 312 S.E.2d 581 (Ct. App. 1984), to......
  • Johnson v. Johnson, No. 1212
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • March 14, 1988
    ...(4) provide for an equitable division of the marital estate, including the manner in which distribution is to take place. Toler v. Toler, 292 S.C. 374, 356 S.E.2d[296 S.C. 294] 429 (Ct.App.1987); Gibson v. Gibson, 283 S.C. 318, 322 S.E.2d 680 Identification of marital property is controlled......
  • Burdeshaw v. Burdeshaw, 2020-UP-105
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • April 8, 2020
    ...into marital property), abrogated on other grounds by Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 384-86, 708 S.E.2d 650, 651-52 (2011); Toler v. Toler, 292 S.C. 374, 380, 356 S.E.2d 429, 432 (Ct. App. 1987) (holding that the proceeds from the sale of the husband's inherited property lost their nonmarita......
  • 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