Dake v. Painter

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Dake v. Painter

341 S.E.2d 620, 288 S.C. 118, 1986 S.C. LEXIS 293

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMarch 5, 1986

Docket22489

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 341 S.E.2d 620 (Dake v. Painter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dake v. Painter, 341 S.E.2d 620, 288 S.C. 118, 1986 S.C. LEXIS 293 (S.C. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Appellant contends that the family court committed error in reducing child support. We agree.

Under an order dated February 3, 1984, respondent was required to make child support payments in the amount of $260.00 every two weeks. The order under appeal reduced the level of child support to $225.00 payable twice a month. Because a reduction in child support was not requested by the pleadings, the family court erred in reducing the frequency and amount of the child support payments. Gainey v. Gainey, 279 S. C. 68, 301 S. E. (2d) 763 (1983); Bass v. Bass, 272 S. C. 177, 249 S. E. (2d) 905 (1978); Bryan v. Bryan, 282 S. C. 506, 319 S. E. (2d) 360 (S. C. App. 1984).

Appellant’s remaining exception is without merit, and is affirmed under Supreme Court Rule 23. Accordingly, we reverse the reduction in child support and affirm the re[119]*119maining portions of the order. Costs under Supreme Court Rule 38 shall be taxed against the respondent.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

Appellant contends that the family court committed error in reducing child support. We agree.

Under an order dated February 3, 1984, respondent was required to make child support payments in the amount of $260.00 every two weeks. The order under appeal reduced the level of child support to $225.00 payable twice a month. Because a reduction in child support was not requested by the pleadings, the family court erred in reducing the frequency and amount of the child support payments. Gainey v. Gainey, 279 S. C. 68, 301 S. E. (2d) 763 (1983); Bass v. Bass, 272 S. C. 177, 249 S. E. (2d) 905 (1978); Bryan v. Bryan, 282 S. C. 506, 319 S. E. (2d) 360 (S. C. App. 1984).

Appellant’s remaining exception is without merit, and is affirmed under Supreme Court Rule 23. Accordingly, we reverse the reduction in child support and affirm the re[119]*119maining portions of the order. Costs under Supreme Court Rule 38 shall be taxed against the respondent.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

341 S.E.2d 620, 288 S.C. 118, 1986 S.C. LEXIS 293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dake-v-painter-sc-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack