From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sadler v. Sadler

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Dec 20, 1920
115 S.C. 217 (S.C. 1920)



December 20, 1920.

Before TOWNSEND, J., York, April term, 1920. Affirmed.

Action by Beatrice Sadler against William Sadler for alimony. From order allowing temporary alimony and suit money, the defendant appeals.

Messrs. T.F. McDow and J.S. Brice, for appellant, cite: Temporary alimony should not be allowed unless wife will probably succeed in her main case: 14 Cyc. 753. Grounds on which alimony will be allowed: 60 S.C. 447; 68 S.C. 124. Husband's control over household: 21 Cyc. 1147c. Burden of proof on wife where she has left the home: 91 S.C. 245; 100 S.C. 299. "Abandonment:" 21 Cyc. 1611, 1612. Allowance of alimony is discretionary, subject to review on appeal: 14 Cyc. 749. Discretion abused: 113 S.C. 123. $300 fee excessive: 14 Cyc. 764; Id. 761.

In reply: Finding of fact reversible if unsupported: 55 S.C. 198; 60 S.C. 449; 68 S.C. 123; 113 S.C. 133.

Messrs. Gaston Hamilton, for respondent, cite: Allowance of temporary alimony and counsel fee is within discretion of Circuit Judge: 107 S.C. 99; 95 S.C. 130; 94 S.C. 11; 94 S.C. 204. Wife required to show prima facie that husband has inflicted such personal indignity as makes living with him intolerable: 91 S.C. 245. Grounds for alimony: 60 S.C. 427; 2 DeS. 45; 4 Des. 183. Right of wife to leave husband: 68 S.C. 123. Relief asked is proper and fee reasonable: 84 S.C. 11; 91 S.C. 246; 94 S.C. 12; 91 S.C. 411; 73 S.C. 129.

December 20, 1920. The opinion of the Court was delivered by

This is an appeal from an order allowing temporary alimony and suit money made by his Honor, Judge Townsend, who heard the matter on affidavits and passed an order allowing the respondent $70 per month, temporary alimony, and allowing her counsel $300 suit money. Appellant appeals, and by six exceptions, alleges error.

The exceptions allege abuse of discretion on the part of his Honor; that the amounts allowed were excessive; that under the showing made he should have refused to allow anything; that the weight of the evidence showed that the respondent had ample means to support herself; and that the appellant had in spirit and in fact performed faithfully all of the duties imposed upon him by his marital obligations.

This Court has repeatedly decided that the allowance of temporary alimony and counsel fee is a matter within the discretion of the Circuit Judge, and we see no abuse of discretion on his part as to the allowance of temporary alimony. But the allowance of counsel of $300 would be excessive if it were for obtaining temporary alimony alone, but, in response to questions by the Court, respondent counsel stated that this was not for obtaining temporary alimony alone, but was to compensate them for all litigation in this matter, from its inception to the end of it, and that the appellant was not to be asked to pay any more for counsel fees in this litigation. That being the case, we will not say that it is excessive; and all exceptions are overruled, and judgment affirmed.


MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GARY and MR. JUSTICE GAGE absent on account of sickness.

Summaries of

Sadler v. Sadler

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Dec 20, 1920
115 S.C. 217 (S.C. 1920)
Case details for

Sadler v. Sadler

Case Details

Full title:SADLER v. SADLER

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Dec 20, 1920


115 S.C. 217 (S.C. 1920)
105 S.E. 285

Citing Cases

State v. Pridmore

A.F. Pridmore was convicted of manslaughter, and he appeals. Messrs. Mendel L. Smith, J.D. Lanford and Price…

Leysath v. Leysath

Messrs. E.B. Friday and Brantley Zeigler, for appellant, cite: Where wife leaves the home voluntarily…