Opinion
2012-UP-617
11-21-2012
Yolanda Lee, f/k/a Yolanda Wall, Respondent. v. Barry L. Wall, Appellant. Appellate Case No. 2010-160066
Kathryne Ann Shelton, of Shelton Law Office, PA, of Columbia, for Appellant. James Howard Swick, of Swick & Hindersman, LLC, of Columbia, for Respondent.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Submitted October 1, 2012
Appeal From Richland County Dorothy Mobley-Jones, Family Court Judge.
Kathryne Ann Shelton, of Shelton Law Office, PA, of Columbia, for Appellant.
James Howard Swick, of Swick & Hindersman, LLC, of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Barry Wall appeals the family court's order, arguing the family court erred in awarding excessive alimony, attorney's fees, and child support to his ex-wife Yolanda Lee, f/k/a Yolanda Wall. We affirm as modified pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:
1.We affirm the family court's award of $800 in permanent, periodic alimony to Lee. See Bodkin v. Bodkin, 388 S.C. 203, 215, 694 S.E.2d 230, 237 (Ct. App. 2010) (holding determinations of whether a spouse is entitled to alimony and the amount to be awarded for alimony are within the discretion of the family court); S.C. Code Ann. § 20-3-130(C) (2011) (requiring the family court to consider the following factors in determining whether to award alimony: (1) duration of the marriage; (2) physical and emotional health of the parties; (3) educational background of the parties; (4) employment history and earning potential of the parties; (5) standard of living established during the marriage; (6) current and reasonably anticipated earnings of the parties; (7) current and reasonably anticipated expenses of the parties; (8) marital and nonmarital properties of the parties; (9) custody of children; (10) marital misconduct or fault; (11) tax consequences; and (12) prior support obligations; as well as (13) other factors the court considers relevant).
2.We affirm the family court's award of partial attorney's fees to Lee. See Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 392, 709 S.E.2d 650, 655 (2011) ("The decision of whether to award . . . attorney['s] fees, rests in the sound discretion of the family court."); Bennett v. Rector, 389 S.C. 274, 284, 697 S.E.2d 715, 720-21 (Ct. App. 2010) ("In deciding whether to award attorney's fees, the family court should consider (1) each party's ability to pay his or her own fees; (2) the beneficial results obtained by the attorney; (3) the parties' respective financial conditions; and (4) the effect of the fees on each party's standard of living."); id. at 284-85, 697 S.E.2d at 721 ("In determining reasonable attorney's fees, the six factors the family court should consider are (1) the nature, extent, and difficulty of the case; (2) the time necessarily devoted to the case; (3) professional standing of counsel; (4) contingency of compensation; (5) beneficial results obtained; [and] (6) customary legal fees for similar services.").
3.We modify the family court's award of child support from $452 to $203 per month. We find the family court failed to consider the alimony awarded to Lee as part of her gross income. S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 114-4720(A)(2) (1997) (providing gross income includes "alimony which a party receives as a result of the current litigation"). Accordingly, we hold Wall should be credited for $7, 968 in excess child support he has paid since April 1, 2010 to November 1, 2012.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
SHORT, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.