Campbell v. McPherson

7 Citing cases

  1. Smith v. Smith

    275 S.C. 494 (S.C. 1980)   Cited 19 times

    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).

  2. Balestrine v. Jordan

    272 S.E.2d 438 (S.C. 1980)   Cited 5 times

    A decree of support may be increased, decreased or terminated due to a change in circumstances pursuant to § 20-3-160, Code of Laws of S.C. (1976). Campbell v. McPherson, 268 S.C. 444, 234 S.E.2d 774 (1977). We conclude there is ample authority for the proposition that the family court has subject matter jurisdiction under URESA to increase the amount of support granted in an out-of-state decree.

  3. Abbott v. Gore

    304 S.C. 116 (S.C. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 12 times
    Holding issue of dependent tax exemption must be specifically plead, because though of "some relation," it is a "separate issue" from child support

    Given the limited record before us, we find no abuse of discretion on the part of the trial judge in increasing the award to $700 monthly. See also Campbell v. McPherson, 268 S.C. 444, 234 S.E.2d 774 (1977) (where a child gets older and becomes a teenager, the child has additional needs). We further note there is no competent evidence of the amount of support indicated by the guidelines.

  4. Nicholson v. Lewis

    295 S.C. 434 (S.C. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 5 times
    Finding trial court properly required father to pay a portion of daughter's remaining educational expenses where daughter worked full time during summer breaks, helped with the upkeep of her automobile, was searching for part time work during the school year, and had obtained grants and student loans

    Mrs. Nicholson testified to an increase in expenses for Charles' food, clothes, school and social activities. See Campbell v.McPherson, 268 S.C. 444, 234 S.E.2d 774 (1977) and Fender v. Fender, 256 S.C. 399, 182 S.E.2d 755 (1971). Further, § 20-7-40 of the South Carolina Code of Laws (1981) provides as follows:

  5. Condon v. Condon

    312 S.E.2d 588 (S.C. Ct. App. 1984)   Cited 7 times
    Finding that the court of appeals must remand issues to the family court for a hearing if the record is insufficient for adequate review on appeal

    The trial court has authority to increase, decrease or terminate, upon a proper showing of a change of conditions, the support payments provided for in a judgment of divorce. 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); Smith v. Smith, 262 S.C. 291, 204 S.E.2d 53 (1974). By providing for an automatic increase in child support, the lower court has arbitrarily increased the amount of support without a showing of a change of conditions.

  6. Nelson v. Merritt

    314 S.E.2d 840 (S.C. Ct. App. 1984)   Cited 15 times

    The fact of inflation can scarcely be used, then, as a justification for reducing child support obligations particularly when, as here, the parent's income has increased more than nominally since the last child support order. SeeSpires v. Higgins, 271 S.C. 530, 248 S.E.2d 488 (1978); cf.Stevenson v. Stevenson, 276 S.C. 475, 279 S.E.2d 616 (1981); Campbell v. McPherson, 268 S.C. 444, 234 S.E.2d 774 (1977); Fender v. Fender, 256 S.C. 399, 182 S.E.2d 755 (1971). The trial judge found that Nelson's remarriage and move to Richmond constituted a changed adverse circumstance for Merritt because the move, necessitated by her remarriage, resulted in increased visitation costs and higher private school tuitions.

  7. Nelson v. Merritt

    313 S.E.2d 309 (S.C. Ct. App. 1984)

    The fact of inflation can scarcely be used, then, as a justification for reducing child support obligations particularly when, as here, the parent's income has increased more than nominally since the last child support order. SeeSpires v. Higgins, 271 S.C. 530, 248 S.E.2d 488 (1978); cf.Stevenson v. Stevenson, 276 S.C. 475, 279 S.E.2d 616 (1981); Campbell v. McPherson, 268 S.C. 444, 234 S.E.2d 774 (1977); Fender v. Fender, 256 S.C. 399, 182 S.E.2d 755 (1971). The trial judge found that Nelson's remarriage and move to Richmond constituted a changed adverse circumstance for Merritt because the move, necessitated by her remarriage, resulted in increased visitation costs and higher private school tuitions.