Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1/18/1999
McDavid v. McDavid
Citations
- 511 S.E.2d 365
- 333 S.C. 490
- 1999 S.C. LEXIS 12
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding an issue not raised to or ruled on by the family court should not be considered by the appellate court
- holding any matter not raised and ruled upon by the family court cannot be considered by this court on appeal
- holding an issue not raised to or ruled on by the family court should not be considered by the appellate court
- holding an issue not raised to or ruled on by the family court should not be considered by the appellate court
- finding that because increase in marital home equity from time of filing to time of trial stemmed from mortgage payments made solely by the wife, the husband was not entitled to share in the increased equity and valuation date should be date of filing
- approving Smith v. Smith, 294 S.C. 194, 203, 363 S.E.2d 404, 409 (Ct.App.1987
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Waller, Finney, Toal, Moore, Burnett
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Altman v. AltmanCourt of Appeals of Tennessee· 2005-04-07· cited 97×
- Dixon v. DixonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1999-02-08· cited 32×
- Deidun v. DeidunCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-11-22· cited 31×
- South Carolina Department of Social Services v. BasnightCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2001-06-28· cited 25×
- Fields v. FieldsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2000-07-21· cited 20×
- Burch v. BurchSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2011-10-31· cited 20×
- Gershman v. GershmanSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-04-08· cited 17×
- Srivastava v. SrivastavaCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2014-12-23· cited 17×
- Parker v. ShecutCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2000-05-22· cited 15×
- Hollar v. HollarCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2000-07-24· cited 14×
- Hatfield Ex Rel. Hyman Law Firm v. Van EppsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-03-08· cited 3×
- Nestberg v. NestbergCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-08-31· cited 2×
- Josie M. Bostick v. Earl A. Bostick, Sr.Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2022-03-02
- Khalil Abbas-Ghaleb v. Anna GhalebCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2024-04-03
- Khalil Abbas-Ghaleb v. Anna GhalebCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2024-10-21
Cites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Johnson v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1988-08-29· cited 186×
- Talley v. South Carolina Higher Education Tuition Grants CommitteeSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1986-07-07· cited 97×
- Smith v. SmithCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1987-12-14· cited 48×
- Smith v. SmithCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1997-06-16· cited 44×
- In re Marriage of OlsonAppellate Court of Illinois· 1992-01-09· cited 36×
- Ebert v. EbertCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1995-11-06· cited 31×
- In Re Marriage of IsaacsAppellate Court of Illinois· 1994-03-30· cited 30×
- Panhorst v. PanhorstCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1990-02-20· cited 26×
- Hatfield v. HatfieldCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1997-06-09· cited 25×
- Peirson v. CalhounCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1992-03-30· cited 20×
- Hollander v. HollanderCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1991-11-01· cited 18×
- Cannon v. CannonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1996-01-22· cited 15×
- Davis v. DavisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1991-07-18· cited 11×
- Goldman v. GoldmanNew Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1991-01-31· cited 9×
- Sien v. SienCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma· 1995-02-24· cited 8×
- Matti v. MattiDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1994-06-24· cited 2×
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.