White v. Boseman, 21268
| Decision Date | 22 July 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 21268,21268 |
| Citation | 275 S.C. 184,268 S.E.2d 287 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Brenda D. WHITE, Appellant, v. James T. BOSEMAN, Respondent. |
Richard J. Whitaker, Beaufort, for appellant.
Larry R. Patterson, Greenville, for respondent.
The appellant initiated this action to require respondent to support two of her children born out of wedlock. The basic issue involved the paternity of the children. The trial judge found that appellant had failed to satisfy the necessary burden of proof to establish the respondent as the natural father of the children and denied the relief sought. We reverse.
On appeal from an order of the Family Court, this Court has jurisdiction to find facts in accordance with its view of the preponderance or the greater weight of the evidence, and may reverse a factual finding by the lower court when the appellant satisfies this Court that the finding is against the preponderance of the evidence. Spires v. Higgins, 271 S.C. 530, 248 S.E.2d 488. With this premise in mind, we review the evidence.
The appellant first met the respondent when she left home to attend college. Although she had not previously been intimately involved with men, she began to regularly have sexual intercourse with the respondent and soon became pregnant. He admitted their sexual activity, but added that he was pretty sure he took contraceptive measures and that he had observed her dating other men during this time. During the pregnancy, two letters from the respondent were received by the appellant. His letters alluded to the pregnancy and indicated his intention to render financial assistance. Later, the child was born and the respondent signed the birth certificate as the father. He contended that the appellant's family threatened disclosure to college officials in order to insure the child had a last name and not to require anything from him. He therefore concluded that his signature was not rendered as an admission of paternity, but rather to prevent his academic scholarship from being jeopardized.
Appellant testified that after the birth of the first child, their romantic interludes resumed and she again became pregnant. However, respondent denied any further sexual activity. During the period of her second pregnancy, the appellant indicated she receive monies to assist by way of financial support. Two notes received through the mail from the respondent were produced to corroborate her testimony. Although ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hudson v. Blanton
...of Appeals may reverse a factual finding if we are convinced the finding is against the greater weight of evidence. White v. Boseman, 275 S.C. 184, 268 S.E.2d 287 (1980); Baron v. Dyslin, 309 S.E.2d 767 Delores Allen Hudson, the mother of Christopher, is now married to the appellant. When C......
-
Eleazer v. Hardaway Concrete Co., Inc., 0153
...finding of fact is against the greater weight of the evidence, the Court of Appeals can reverse the factual finding. White v. Boseman, 275 S.C. 184, 268 S.E.2d 287 (1980); Baron v. Dyslin, supra. While we agree with the trial judge as to the amount Eleazer should recover as costs and disbur......
-
Clinkscales v. Clinkscales, 21300
...by the lower court when the appellant satisfies this Court that the finding is against the preponderance of the evidence. White v. Boseman, S.C., 268 S.E.2d 287, 1980. § 34-11-10 concerns the nature of bank deposits made in the name of two persons. It When any deposit has been made in any b......
-
Baron v. Dyslin
...factual finding if the appellant convinces the court that the finding is against the greater weight of the evidence. White v. Boseman, 275 S.C. 184, 268 S.E.2d 287 (1980). The question of whether the family court finding challenged here should be reversed depends upon whether Dyslin carried......