Opinion ID: 1267777
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Alimony (Maintenance and Support)

Text: The wife argues that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to award alimony. We agree. As noted above, this is an action for separate maintenance and support, not a divorce. An award of alimony in this type of action, however, is to be made according to the principles controlling in divorce actions. S.C. Code Ann. § 20-3-140 (Supp. 1989). The factors to be considered in awarding alimony set forth in Lide v. Lide , 277 S.C. 155, 283 S.E. (2d) 832 (1981) are as follows: (1) the financial condition of the husband and the needs of the wife; (2) the age and health of the parties, their respective earning capacity, their individual wealth; (3) the wife's contribution to the accumulation of their joint wealth; (4) the conduct of the parties; (5) the respective necessities of the parties; (6) the standard of living of the wife at the time of the divorce; (7) the duration of the marriage; (8) the ability of the husband to pay alimony; and (9) the actual income of the parties. We find that the trial court did not give adequate consideration to these factors. This action ended a 30 year marriage. At the time of the separation, the couple enjoyed a moderate to upper middle class standard of living. The husband's net monthly income is approximately $2,250, while the wife's gross monthly income is only $900. In addition, the husband has savings plans and will receive retirement income from two sources, while the wife has not savings and no retirement. While the wife apparently did not contribute a great amount monetarily, she did contribute to the marriage as a homemaker and caretaker of three children. The trial court found that the husband was financially unable to make any payments and that the wife was not entitled to any payments. The latter comment was apparently based on the trial judge's finding that the wife had used abusive language, threatened, cursed, berated and embarrassed the husband, thereby adding to the marital discord, rendering further life together impossible. It is our opinion that this finding was not supported by the evidence. Although there was some testimony to this effect, an equal amount of testimony was presented regarding the husband's abusive nature and drinking habits. We conclude that the denial of alimony was an abuse discretion and should be remanded. The record should be reopened to allow testimony concerning the wife's changed health condition and the trial court is directed to give adequate consideration to all relevant factors.