Mick-Skaggs v. Skaggs
766 S.E.2d 870, 411 S.C. 94 (2014)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Adultery proven by a clear preponderance of the evidence serves as an absolute statutory bar to alimony, even when the court grants the divorce on no-fault grounds and the evidence of adultery does not meet the higher corroboration standard required to serve as the legal ground for the divorce itself.
Facts:
- Coleen Mick-Skaggs (Wife) and William Skaggs (Husband) married in 1991 and separated in October 2009.
- In September 2008, Wife retired from her job as a paralegal due to numerous health conditions, including an inoperable spinal tumor, and began receiving Social Security disability benefits.
- After the separation, on the night of her birthday, Wife went to a bar where she consumed a significant amount of alcohol.
- Witnesses William Russo and Mary Katherine Fisher observed Wife behaving affectionately with and kissing another man at the bar.
- Russo witnessed the man follow Wife home in a separate vehicle, enter her home at her invitation, and not emerge for at least 25-30 minutes.
- The next morning at 5:30 a.m., Husband drove by Wife's home and saw the same man's unoccupied car still parked outside.
- Wife sent a text message from her phone stating she was French kissing men at a bar and intended to 'rope me a cowboy.'
- Husband was observed by a witness rubbing the lower back of another woman, Debbie Scott, under her shirt, and a private investigator saw them together alone in his barn late at night on multiple occasions.
Procedural Posture:
- Coleen Mick-Skaggs (Wife) filed for divorce against William Skaggs (Husband) in family court, alleging Husband's adultery.
- Husband answered, counterclaimed, and later amended his pleadings to request a divorce based on one year's continuous separation.
- Prior to the final hearing, the family court issued a temporary order requiring Husband to pay Wife $1,500 per month in temporary alimony.
- Following a final hearing, the family court granted the divorce on the no-fault ground of one year's separation.
- The family court found that Wife had committed adultery, which barred her from receiving alimony, and ordered her to reimburse Husband for the temporary alimony he had paid.
- Wife (appellant) appealed the family court's order to the Court of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a spouse's adultery, proven by a clear preponderance of circumstantial evidence showing inclination and opportunity, act as a complete bar to receiving alimony even if the court grants the divorce on the no-fault ground of one year's separation?
Opinions:
Majority - Williams, J.
Yes. A spouse's adultery, when proven by a clear preponderance of the evidence, acts as a complete bar to receiving alimony, regardless of the grounds on which the divorce is ultimately granted. While the family court incorrectly stated that uncorroborated testimony could bar alimony, this court finds that sufficient corroborating testimony of Wife's adultery was, in fact, presented. The rule requiring corroboration may be relaxed in contested divorce actions where there is no evidence of collusion. Here, the combined testimony of William Russo, Husband, and Mary Katherine Fisher, along with Wife's own text messages, established a clear preponderance of evidence showing both inclination and opportunity for Wife to commit adultery. This evidence was sufficiently definite to identify the time, place, and circumstances of the offense. Therefore, even though the divorce was granted on the no-fault ground of one year's separation, Wife's adultery statutorily bars her from receiving any alimony and requires the reimbursement of temporary alimony.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the evidentiary distinction between proving adultery as a ground for a fault-based divorce versus proving it as a bar to alimony in South Carolina. The court reinforces that the corroboration requirement, designed to prevent collusion, can be relaxed in genuinely contested cases. This allows a finding of adultery for alimony purposes based on a 'clear preponderance' of circumstantial evidence, even if that same evidence is deemed insufficient to grant the divorce on fault grounds. The ruling solidifies adultery as a potent financial defense in divorce litigation, creating a complete and unforgiving bar to alimony that is independent of the official grounds for the dissolution of the marriage.
Unlock the full brief for Mick-Skaggs v. Skaggs