Stoney v. Stoney
421 S.C. 528
| S.C. | 2017Background
- This case concerns appeals from a family court custody/support decision in which the Court of Appeals reversed and ordered a new trial on multiple grounds.
- Petitioners (Richard S.W. Stoney Sr. and Theodore D. Stoney Jr.) sought certiorari review of the Court of Appeals decision.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address the standard of appellate review applied to family court matters.
- The Court held the Court of Appeals misapplied the proper standard by repeatedly relying on "abuse of discretion" rather than conducting a full de novo review as required by South Carolina law.
- The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for reconsideration under the de novo standard articulated in Lewis v. Lewis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper standard of review in family court appeals | Respondent (Stoney) implicitly supported Court of Appeals' review | Petitioners argued Court of Appeals erred by using "abuse of discretion" instead of de novo | Court: de novo is the correct standard per S.C. Const. art. V, § 5 and Lewis v. Lewis |
| Application of Lewis v. Lewis | Stoney relied on Court of Appeals' factual findings | Petitioners argued Lewis requires appellate courts to make independent factual findings where appropriate | Court: Lewis requires de novo review, but respects trial judge's credibility assessments; appellate court must apply Lewis fully |
| Reversals based on multiple errors ("domino effect") | Stoney maintained Court of Appeals' reversals were warranted | Petitioners argued one perceived error should not cascade absent de novo reassessment | Court: Because Court of Appeals used wrong standard, its multi-issue reversals are unreliable and require re-evaluation under de novo review |
| Guidance to lower courts and practitioners | Stoney defended existing appellate practice | Petitioners urged clarification to prevent misuse of "abuse of discretion" terminology | Court: Reiterated de novo standard for family court appeals and warned against conflating it with "abuse of discretion" |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 709 S.E.2d 650 (S.C. 2011) (establishes de novo review in family court appeals while recognizing trial judge's advantage on credibility)
- Dorman v. Dep't of Health & Envtl. Control, 350 S.C. 159, 565 S.E.2d 119 (Ct. App. 2002) (emphasizes critical importance of the appellate standard of review)
- McKinney v. Pedery, 413 S.C. 475, 776 S.E.2d 566 (S.C. 2015) (example of post-Lewis appellate decisions citing varied standards)
- Reed v. Pieper, 393 S.C. 424, 713 S.E.2d 309 (S.C. Ct. App. 2011) (illustrates cases cited alongside Lewis where standard language has been inconsistent)