Opinion ID: 2509669
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Attorney's Fees Assessed Against Wife

Text: Wife asserts the family court improperly assessed attorney's fees. We disagree. The family court expressed frustration at Wife's non-cooperation and delay. [7] After concluding that the positions taken by [Wife] were not reasonable or appropriate, the court awarded Husband $3,250 in attorney's fees. Wife asserts that the family court improperly relied on evidence of mediation in violation of ADR Rule 8(a)(4) on confidentiality to award attorney's fees. [8] Specifically, the family court found that the majority of the issues brought before the Court by [Wife] were of such a nature that they should have been resolved by the parties through agreement and/or mediation. It is not clear that the family court considered confidential communications in reaching its decision to award attorney's fees because it merely looked at the nature of the issues brought before the [c]ourt. Id. Even if the family court considered evidence of mediation, the Record suggests that both parties may have waived confidentiality by agreeing to voluntarily submit the various offers of settlement for the court's consideration. See Eason v. Eason, 384 S.C. 473, 480, 682 S.E.2d 804, 807 (2009) (a waiver is a voluntary and intentional abandonment or relinquishment of a known right) (citations omitted); Laser Supply and Servs., Inc. v. Orchard Park Assocs., 382 S.C. 326, 336-38, 676 S.E.2d 139, 145 (Ct.App.2009) (the determination of whether one's actions constitute waiver is a question of fact). Nevertheless, the Record provides sufficient independent grounds for the family court to award attorney's fees based on Wife's non-cooperation and delay. Thus, we affirm the family court's award of $3,250 in attorney's fees.