## Facts

- The parties married in 1991 and separated in October 2009 after an approximately eighteen-year marriage.
- Wife filed for divorce alleging Husband’s adultery; Husband counterclaimed alleging Wife’s adultery and later sought a no-fault divorce based on one year’s continuous separation.
- A temporary order required Husband to maintain Wife’s health insurance and pay $1,500 per month in temporary alimony.
- Before trial, the parties settled equitable distribution and marital debt; the remaining disputes were adultery-based divorce grounds and Wife’s entitlement to alimony.
- Wife testified she was disabled, received $982 per month in Social Security disability benefits, and had significant medical conditions and medication expenses.
- Husband introduced photographs of Wife participating in horse shows to challenge the extent of her claimed disability; Wife asserted most photos predated her receipt of disability benefits.
- On adultery, Husband presented text messages from Wife’s phone and witness testimony that Wife was seen with another man who accompanied her to her home; additional testimony and messages supported that account.
- Wife presented testimony and investigative evidence suggesting Husband was repeatedly alone with another woman at his home and in public.
- The family court granted a divorce on one year’s continuous separation, denied Wife’s request for an adultery-based divorce, found Wife committed adultery, denied her alimony, admitted the horse-show photographs, and required each party to pay their own attorney’s fees.

## Issues

1. Whether the family court erred by granting a divorce on one year’s continuous separation rather than granting Wife a divorce on Husband’s alleged adultery.
2. Whether the family court erred by denying Wife alimony based on a finding that Wife committed adultery, including whether corroboration was required and shown.
3. Whether admitting photographs of Wife at horse shows was reversible evidentiary error due to unfair prejudice.
4. Whether the family court abused its discretion by requiring Wife to pay her own attorney’s fees.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the divorce granted on one year’s continuous separation.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of alimony, concluding Wife’s adultery was sufficiently proven and barred alimony.
- The Court of Appeals acknowledged the family court misstated the law on corroboration for adultery as an alimony bar but held the error harmless because the record contained adequate corroboration.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed admission of the photographs, finding any prejudicial effect was limited relative to their probative value.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed as modified regarding attorney’s fees, leaving intact the result that Wife paid her own fees and finding no abuse of discretion on the record presented.

## Legal Principles

- When evidence of adultery is conflicting, the family court has discretion to grant a no-fault divorce on one year’s continuous separation.
- In South Carolina, proven adultery bars an award of alimony to the adulterous spouse.
- Adultery relied upon to bar alimony must be supported by corroborating evidence; an incorrect legal statement on corroboration may be harmless if the record independently provides sufficient corroboration.
- Photographs and similar evidence are admissible unless their probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice; limited clarity and quality may reduce prejudicial effect.
- Attorney’s fees in family court are discretionary; an appellant must supply an adequate record (including financial information) to show an abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals upheld a no-fault divorce based on one year’s separation, affirmed denial of alimony because Wife’s adultery was corroborated and therefore barred support, found no reversible error in admitting horse-show photographs, and affirmed (with minor modification) the ruling that each party bear their own attorney’s fees.


Mick-Skaggs v. Skaggs, 411 S.C. 94, 766 S.E.2d 870 (Ct. App. 2014)