John R. v. Outi K.R.

Full title: John R., Respondent, v. Outi K. R., Appellant. John R., Respondent, v…

Court: THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: Apr 25, 2012

Case # 1999-DR-23-2327 (S.C. Ct. App. Apr. 25, 2012)

Opinion

Case # 1999-DR-23-2327 Case # 2005-DR-23-4336 Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-239  

04-25-2012

John R., Respondent, v. Outi K. R., Appellant. John R., Respondent, v. Outi K., Appellant

Outi K. T., pro se, for Appellant. Stephen John Henry, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

.

Appeal From Greenville County

Robert N. Jenkins, Sr., Family Court Judge

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED

Outi K. T., pro se, for Appellant.

Stephen John Henry, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM : Outi K. T. (Mother) appeals from the family court's order holding her in contempt for willfully violating a prior order by failing to obtain employment and file an updated financial declaration. Among other arguments, Mother asserts the family court erred in (1) refusing to admit evidence concerning a medical condition that prevented her from complying with the prior order, (2) finding clear and convincing evidence established her violation of the prior order was willful, and (3) ordering her to pay continuing child support, child support arrearages, John R.'s (Father's) attorney's fees, and costs related to the hearing. We affirm as modified pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Simmons v. Simmons, 392 S.C. 412, 414, 709 S.E.2d 666, 667 (2011) (providing for de novo review of appeals from the family court); Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 392, 709 S.E.2d 650, 655 (2011) (recognizing the "superior position of the family court judge in making credibility determinations" and placing upon the appellant the burden of convincing the appellate court that the preponderance of the evidence is against the family court's findings).

We affirm the family court's decision but modify the family court's order to extend the time for Mother to complete payment of the retroactive child support, attorney's fees, and costs ordered by the family court to August 31, 2012. See Rule 241, SCACR (providing family court orders requiring payment of child support, attorney's fees, or costs in marital litigation are not automatically stayed upon appeal).

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

FEW, C.J., SHORT, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.