Buist v. Buist

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding a motion to reconsider constitutes a timely challenge to a fee award but finding the husband failed to preserve his argument when his motion to reconsider was not sufficiently specific
• holding a motion to reconsider constitutes a timely challenge to a fee award but finding the husband failed to preserve his argument when his motion to reconsider was not sufficiently specific
• noting that a party need not use the precise legal term to preserve an issue, but \the party nonetheless must be sufficiently clear in framing his objection so as to draw the court's attention to the precise nature of the alleged error\
• stating argument that the family court did not adequately apply the Glasscock or E.D.M. factors was not preserved when husband's argument in Rule 59(e) motion was not sufficiently specific
• reversing the family court's distribution of marital property and remanding the issue when the family court \divided certain real and personal property without determining the fair market value of all the property\
• stating an objection to an award of attorney's fees is not preserved unless the objecting party raised the specific objection either at trial or in a motion to alter or amend pursuant to Rule 59(e), SCRCP

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).