Spreeuw v. Barker

How courts have described this case

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

• holding Father’s refusal to provide the family court with a meaningful representation of his current income precluded him from complaining of the family court’s ruling on appeal
• finding that “even if the family court erred in determining Father’s gross income, such error was caused by Father’s failure to provide the court with accurate financial information”
• determining that an appellant has failed to preserve an issue for appellate review where he did not raise an issue at trial and raised it for the first time in post-trial motions
• stating evidence that first appeared as attachment to a Rule 59(e), SCRCP motion cannot be considered on appeal
• finding the defendant's form about expenses appeared \only as an attachment to his Rule 59(e) motion\ and could not be considered on appeal
• finding it could not consider a document that was submitted to the family court \only as an attachment to [the father's] Rule 59(e) motion\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).