Court Opinion

ID: 9854544
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:08:59.235044+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:08.782078
License: Public Domain

Goolsby, Judge
(concurring):
I concur in the court’s opinion. Lest we be misunderstood and our opinion be viewed to hold that a spouse must show that he or she contributed to the acquisition of particular property before being entitled to an equitable interest therein, the marital estate in the instant case consisted, as the trial court found, only of the husband’s military pension. See Wilson v. Wilson, 270 S. C. 216, 241 S. E. (2d) 566 (1978); Reid v. Reid, 280 S. C. 367, 312 S. E. (2d) 724 (Ct. App. 1984). The wife made no contribution to the acquisition of the marital property, such as it was; therefore, she was not entitled to a distributive share thereof, even were we to assume that a military pension may now be considered marital property in South Carolina. See S. C. Code of Laws § 20-7-473 (1976) (Supp. 1987); Watson v. Watson, 291 S. C. 13, 351 S. E. (2d) 883, n. 2 (Ct. App. 1986).