Legal Opinion
Pool v. Pool
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided January 5, 1998No. 24733PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALLER, Justice:
On appeal is a family court order requiring, in pertinent part, Petitioner Deborah Ann Pool (“Wife”) to pay certain attorney’s fees and costs to Respondent William R. Pool (“Husband”). The Court of Appeals affirmed. Pool v. Pool, 321 S.C. 84, 467 S.E.2d 753 (Ct.App.1996). This Court granted certiorari. We affirm as modified.
DISCUSSION
Before the Court of Appeals, Wife argued error in the award of attorney’s fees and private investigator costs because Husband failed to raise them in his pleadings. The Court of Appeals, without specifically ruling on this issue, affirmed pursuant…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Soil & Material Engineers, Inc. v. Folly AssociatesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1987
- Ball v. Canadian American Exp. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1994
- Foggie v. CSX Transportation, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
- Forrester v. Smith & Steele Builders, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1988
3Cited by11 opinions
- Staubes v. City of Folly BeachSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
- Tanner v. Florence County TreasurerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
- Armstrong v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2005
- Father v. South Carolina Department of Social ServicesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
- City of North Myrtle Beach v. Lewis-DavisCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2004
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.