Gilfillin v. Gilfillin
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1DissentMoore, Justice
I respectfully dissent. I would hold the family court had statutory authority to order Husband to set up an alimony trust. Even if the family court did not have the authority, as the majority holds, I would remand the case for the family court to reconsider an award of lump sum alimony.
I agree with the majority’s conclusion that § 20-3-130(D) is ambiguous and thus the intent of the legislature needs to be ascertained in interpreting this code section. Gilstrap v. South Carolina Budget & Control Bd., 310 S.C. 210, 423 S.E.2d 101 (1992)(if statute is ambiguous, primary rule of construction is…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Gilstrap Ex Rel. Gilstrap v. South Carolina Budget & Control BoardSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
- Jacobitti v. JacobittiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
- Thornton v. ThorntonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1997
- McCune v. McCuneSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
- Hendricks v. HendricksCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.