The "Temporary" Nature of Temporary Hearings
This week, I have explained certain aspects of temporary hearings in Family Court cases in South Carolina. One of the things that I explain to all of my clients before these hearings is "No matter what happens, good or bad, this is only temporary." I also reassure my clients that I am not telling them that to prepare them for bad news, as I discuss this point all my clients, whether I think the hearing will go our way or not.
Because the Court is only given certain slices of information by the parties and there is no opportunity for cross-examination at these hearings, the Court must make decisions while using incomplete and often contradictory information. To make matters worse, some Affidavits contain misleading, inaccurate, and even false information, which further complicates the Court's decision-making process. The result is that sometimes the Court can make the wrong decision at a temporary hearing, but the client can take some comfort knowing that it will likely later be rectified at a final hearing.
So does it make sense for parties to use inaccurate information in their Affidavits at these hearings? The answer is "absolutely not", and it is very short-sighted for a party to take that approach. Since Affidavits are sworn statements, all information contained in them is subject to being used to impeach their authors at trial, and witness credibility is extremely important in Family Court because many issues are "he said / she said". Once a witness loses his/her credibility on any issue, the Court will be much more critical of everything that witness says, and it may believe none of that person's testimony – which can impact the outcome of the case and makes this an unwise gamble.
I agree with the advise you give to your clients, however temporary does not mean "short term". I had a temporary ruling that lasted over 2 years. A temporary ruling, although temporary by definition, can create such a negative financial impact that one can not recover. I recently had another temporary child support ruling in which I pointed out obvious errors to the judge in the opposing side financial declaration. I submitted over nights visits of 162 days with each day clearly marked on the calendar. The opposing party submitted nothing. The judge allowed for both sides to resubmit over night and the opposing side submitted 147 wihout clear explaination. Regardless, the judge accepted 147 days and decided to NOT use schedule C and use schedule A of DSS Child Support Guidelines and reasoned that it would not be a financial hardship upon me even though my financial affidavit shows that I would end up negative by almost $700/mo whereas the opposing side was positive, live with her parent, pay no household bills. In addition we were under a final court order in which child support was determined by splitting children expenses 50/50 and I was required to carry health and dental insurance. Temporary is not always temporary when you can not comply with the terms of the order. No doubt, I can not afford these payement and will be facing a RTSC soon. It may get corrected at the final hearing, but that doesn't help me in the short term. I have to forgo house payments or not make child support payments. Either way, I loose - RTSC or foreclosure?
Correctly stated Wendell, "Temporary". For who, the custodial parent who has most of the heartaches or the absent parent who just enjoys life as it comes. I had a so called "Temporary Order" that had a modification of payments that was a deviation downwards or whatever that means. The absent parent was in between jobs and receiving unemployment payments so from what his attorney said to me was you would rather get this than to not get nothing at all wouldn't you. So I agreed to take what was on the paper (50% cut), which I was lead to believe had come from the court system, but later found out after I had left the conference, it was printed out in his attorney's office the day before the conference. The new payment took into consideration his amount he was getting on unemployment checks and having 2 other children in the home at the time(1 has since turned 18). He was told that if any changes happen with his income or situation they must be reported within 10 days. Good luck with that one. From June til November he had gained new employment and not reported it and I asked for a new hearing at the time I became aware of this. During this conference I repeatedly asked to see a judge to have him/her decide on the guidelines for payments and if any retroactive payments were necessary. I had exordinary medical bills for the child we have and was working part-time with all living expenses to pay half of and activities for our child that I had to pay that all of the child support didn't pay. He moved to another state and decided to buy a huge peice of property there and keep the home which was paid for he had in our state. He got another great paying job but during the conference, I was told that we did not have enough changes to have a judge hear my case and was asked to leave. My Child support "attorney/?" did not do what she is paid to do and that's be a representative for my son. She laughed with his attorney outside the room where I sat as if to say, I'm playing with the enemy. So it's been 2 years, as Wendell said, of struggles and let downs trying to get a fair hearing in this case, and being stuck with a "Temporary Order" based on an unemployment salary.
I'm, "Still Alive and Lasting" aka SAL
I am going thru this temporary thing as well. I did get a notice 2 years after the original filing from the clerk of court stating that according to an order by the Chief justice of the Supreme court dated May 9, 2006 stating that,"It was ordered that all domestic relations cases with the exception of DSS abuse and neglect, be disposed of within 365 days of their filing".etc I received this 2 years after the original filing and nothing was filed up to the date that I received this letter from the clerk of court.
I had my attorney check with the family court and nothing had been filed.
I asked an attorney why was this not dropped and he said" That no one went by that order because The Chief Justice ( he called her by name) was just throwing her weight around and that order doesnt mean anything to anyone...
Is this true that an order from the supreme court of the state doesnt apply to family court??
I am currently trying to decide whether or not to send I a letter to the Chief Justice about what I was told during my conversation with this lawyer...