Walker v. Walker

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.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Sabrina E. Walker, Respondent,

v.

Kenneth A. Walker, Appellant.

Appeal From Greenville County

Rochelle W. Conits, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-478

Submitted November 1, 2010 – Filed November 1, 2010

AFFIRMED

O.W. Bannister, of Greenville, for Appellant.

Michael J. Anzelmo, of Columbia; Megan Griffith Sandefur, of
Myrtle Beach; and Richard N. Tapp, of Greenville, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  In this domestic action, Kenneth A. Walker (Husband)
appeals the family court's order awarding Sabrina E. Walker (Wife) $5,000 in
alimony and $15,000 in attorney's fees. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the
following authorities: 

1.   As to whether the family court erred in awarding Wife $5,000 in
alimony: S.C. Code Ann. § 20-3-130(C) (Supp. 2009) (identifying the factors the
family court must consider in awarding alimony); Browder v. Browder, 382
S.C. 512, 518-19, 675 S.E.2d 820, 823 (Ct. App. 2009) ("An award of alimony
rests within the sound discretion of the family court and will not be disturbed
absent an abuse of discretion.  An abuse of discretion occurs if the
court's ruling is controlled by an error of law or if the ruling is based upon
findings of fact that are without evidentiary support.") (internal citations
omitted).

2.   As to whether the family court erred in awarding Wife $15,000 in
attorney's fees: S.C. Code Ann. § 63-3-530(A)(38) (2010) ("Suit money, including
attorney's fees, may be assessed for or against a party to an action brought in
or subject to the jurisdiction of the family court."); Davis v. Davis,
372 S.C. 64, 88, 641 S.E.2d 446, 458 (Ct. App. 2006) ("An award of attorney's
fees lies within the sound discretion of the family court and will not be
disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion."); E.D.M. v. T.A.M.,
307 S.C. 471, 476-77, 415 S.E.2d 812, 816 (1992) ("In determining whether an
attorney's fee should be awarded, the following factors should be considered: (1) the party's ability to pay his/her own attorney's fee; (2)
beneficial results obtained by the attorney; (3) the parties' respective
financial conditions; and (4) effect of the attorney's fee on each party's
standard of living."); Glasscock v. Glasscock, 304 S.C. 158, 161, 403
S.E.2d 313, 315 (1991) ("[T]he six factors . . . in determining a reasonable
attorney's fee:  (1) the nature, extent, and difficulty of
the case; (2) the time necessarily devoted to the case; (3) professional
standing of counsel; (4) contingency of compensation; (5) beneficial results
obtained; [and] (6) customary legal fees for similar services.").

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., SHORT and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without
oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.