Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Terry v. Terry

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided November 21, 2012No. 27196Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Hearn

I concur in the majority’s excellent opinion and write separately only to address my concern with the dissent’s use of the term “temporary equitable division.” The majority quite correctly notes that the nature of the relief ordered was not argued by Husband in his effort to avoid compliance with the temporary order, and that it would contravene settled appellate principles for us to consider an issue not raised to us. In addition to that, I would note that by its very nature and pursuant to the statute which authorizes it, equitable division is a permanent remedy employed by the family court…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Chris v. ChrisSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
  2. County of Greenville v. MannSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
  3. Neville v. NevilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API