Simmons v. Simmons
392 S.C. 412
| S.C. | 2011Background
- Essie Simmons and Rubin Simmons divorced in 1990 and entered a family court-approved settlement, including a provision that Rubin would pay Essie one-third of Social Security benefits at 62 or one-half at 65, treated as property settlement, not alimony.
- Rubin reached ages 62 (1994) and 65 (1997) but paid nothing toward Essie under the Social Security provision.
- In 2003 Essie sought a rule to show cause to enforce the agreement; Rubin challenged the court’s subject matter jurisdiction to order division of Social Security benefits.
- The family court dismissed Rubin’s jurisdiction challenge; the Court of Appeals held the SSA precluded division and voided that portion of the agreement.
- Essie sought to reopen the entire matter (including alimony) under Rule 60(b)(5); the family court denied reconsideration, leading to this appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May the family court reconsider a partly voided agreement? | Essie argues the court has jurisdiction to revisit the voided portion. | Rubin contends the court lacks authority to reopen the agreement. | Yes; court has jurisdiction to reconsider the voided part. |
| Scope of remand after partial voiding—only property division or include alimony? | Essie urges broader remand to address all issues including alimony. | Rubin favors limited remand to remaining property division aspects. | Remand includes all issues, including alimony, in light of the interdependence of the settlement terms. |
| Relation to Rule 60(b)(5) relief and equity after decades? | Essie relies on Rule 60(b)(5) to reopen when equitable that the judgment applies prospectively is questionable. | Rubin argues against reopening after long time and post-voiding changes. | Court may remand to reconsider in light of equity under Rule 60(b)(5). |
Key Cases Cited
- Rutherford v. Rutherford, 307 S.C. 199 (1992) (authority to review factual and legal issues de novo in family court appeals)
- Inabinet v. Inabinet, 236 S.C. 52 (1960) (equity review of challenged findings and legal conclusions)
- Simmons v. Simmons, 370 S.C. 109 (Ct.App.2006) (Court of Appeals held SSA § 407(a) preempts division of Social Security benefits)