Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 10/29/2001
Allen v. Allen
Citations
- 554 S.E.2d 421
- 347 S.C. 177
- 2001 S.C. App. LEXIS 135
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding the purpose of alimony is to place the supported spouse, to the extent possible, in the position she enjoyed during the marriage
- stating that in considering the alimony factors, \[n]o one factor is dispositive.\
- providing that in making an alimony award \[n]o one factor is dispositive\
- stating the family court has a duty to formulate an alimony award that is fit, equitable, and just if the claim is well-founded
- rejecting the husband's argument that \the duration of a marriage should be calculated from the date of marriage to the date of commencement of marital litigation\
- noting an award of alimony rests within the sound discretion of the family court
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Huff, Goolsby, Stilwell
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
42 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Wooten v. WootenSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2005-06-06· cited 102×
- Crossland v. CrosslandSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2014-07-02· cited 58×
- Davis v. DavisCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2006-12-21· cited 49×
- Craig v. CraigSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2005-07-25· cited 47×
- Pirri v. PirriCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2006-05-22· cited 44×
- Bodkin v. BodkinCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2010-05-27· cited 43×
- Butler v. ButlerCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2009-08-19· cited 33×
- Deidun v. DeidunCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-11-22· cited 31×
- Smith v. SmithCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2009-12-09· cited 25×
- Reiss v. ReissCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-02-23· cited 25×
- Dickert v. DickertSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2010-03-29· cited 22×
- Myers v. MyersCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-01-20· cited 21×
- Browder v. BrowderCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2009-03-26· cited 18×
- Bojilov v. BojilovCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2018-09-19· cited 18×
- Holmes v. HolmesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2012-08-15· cited 18×
- Craig v. CraigCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-03-22· cited 16×
- Roberson v. RobersonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-05-24· cited 13×
- Abercrombie v. AbercrombieCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2007-04-02· cited 11×
- Wooten v. WootenCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2003-06-05· cited 9×
- Gorecki v. GoreckiCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2010-04-05· cited 8×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Wilder Corp. v. WilkeSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1998-03-09· cited 665×
- Johnson v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1988-08-29· cited 186×
- Stevenson v. StevensonSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1981-06-22· cited 116×
- Cherry v. ThomassonSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1981-07-09· cited 113×
- Lide v. LideSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1981-10-26· cited 67×
- Woodward v. WoodwardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1987-12-14· cited 51×
- Hardin v. HardinCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1987-12-07· cited 13×
- Williams v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1988-12-05· cited 11×
- Gilfillin v. GilfillinSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2001-03-26· cited 11×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.