Annie's Divorce

***************************************************

Deborah B. Dantzler

Attorney At Law

October 13, 2000

Re: Anaith Hallman vs. Arthur B. Hallman, 00-DR-26-2802

Dear Mr. Hallman:

Enclosed are the clocked copies of the order granting Ex-parte restraining order, Family Court cover sheet, order dispensing with meditaton, an affidavit of Anaith Hallman, summons and complaint, motion of temporary relief, notice of motion hearing, custody jurisdiction afidavit, and notice of lis pendens in the above-named case, which I hereby serve upon you, and a certificate of service by mail.

Respectfully,

Deborah B. Dantzler

___________________________________________________

___________________________________________________

TO: THE DEFENDANT, ARTHUR B. HALLMAN, ABOVE NAMED:

YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to Answer the Complaint in this action, a copy of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer on the attorney for the Plaintiff, Deborah B. Dantzler, at her office located at 1025 Third Avenue, PO Box 1895, Conway, South Carolina 29528, within thirty (30) days after the service thereof, exclusive of the day of such service. If you fail to Answer the Complaint within this time, the Plaintiff in this action will apply to the court for the relief demanded in the Complaint.

Plaintiff, complaining of the Defendant, alleges as follows:

1. Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of Horry County, South Carolina and has been for more than one year prior to the commencement of this action.

2. Upon information and belief, Defendant is a resident of the state of Texas.

3. The parties were married on October 3, 1975. Due to unhappy differences they separated in 1993 and have lived separate and apart without cohabitation since that time.

4. Plaintiff is informed and believes that she is entitled to a divorce a vinculo matrimonii based upon the statutory grounds of continuous separation for one year and ask that this Court grant her the same.

5. Six children were adopted into this marriage:
A. Luis Albert Hallman, date of birth ___.
B. Marta Elizabeth Hallman, date of birth ____.
C. Vanessa Yamel Hallman, date of birth ____.
D. Cody Jasmine Hallman, date of birth ____.
E. Felix Gonzalex Hallman, date of birth ____.
F. Hadasseh Helena Hallman, date of birth ____.

Of the six children adopted to this mariage, Luis Albert Hallman, Marta Elizabeth Hallman, Cody Jasmine Hallman, and Felix Gonzalez Hallman are all emancipated.

6. Plaintiff has always been the primary care-giver of the minor children and has a warm and nuturing relatonship with them. She is informed and believes that it is in the best interest of the minor children that she be granted custody, pendente lite and permanently, and ask that this Court grant her the same.

7. Defendant has repeatedly mistreated the children when they were in his care by refusing to feed them and refusing to allow Hadasseh to use her inhaler to treat her ashma. The children are afraid of Defendant. Plaintiff is informed and believes that it is in the best interest of the minor children that Defendant not be granted visitaton due to Defendant's strained relationship between himself and the children.

8. Throughout the marriage, Defendant has been the primary wage earner in the family. Plaintiff is in need of alimony to maintain the standard of living attained during the marriage. Plaintiff is informed and believes that she is entitled to alimony, pendente lite and permanently, and asks that this court grant her the same.

9. Upon information and belief Defendant is an able-bodied man and capable of earning sufficient income to pay a reasonable amount of child support. Plaintiff is informed and believes that she is entitled to child support according to the South Carolina Child Support Guidlines, pendente lite and permanently, and asks that this Court award her the same.

10. Throughout the marriage the parties have acquired material property and debts. Plaintiff has contributed to their acquisition both directly and indirectly. Plaintiff is informed and believes that she is entitled to an equitable division of the material property and debts and asks that this Court grant her the same.

11. Defendant has shown very little concern for his family or respect for authority in recent years. Plaintiff is informed and believes that if this Court were to award marital property, Defendant will refuse to execute any documents necessary to transfer property to her. If such does occur, Plaintiff asks that this Court, in the alternative, allow the Clerk of Court to execute a deed transfering any property awarded to her.

12. Defendant has lived in Texas for the past several years while Plaintiff and the minor children have continued to live in the former marital residence. Plaintiff is in need of the former marital residence to continue to provide a home for herself and for the minor children. Plaintiff asks that this Court grant her temporary possession of the former marital residence.

13. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant is in possession of the permanent alien cards and passports for the children, Vanessa Yamel Hallman, Cody Jasmine Hallman, Hadasseh Helena Hallman, and for Arthur Bruce Hallman, a minor child residing with the Plaintiff. Plaintiff is in need of these legal documents so that she may take care of legal matters concerning the children and asks that this Court order Defendant to immediately return these documents to her.

14. Defendant has a violent temper. He accuses the Plaintiff of being possessed by demons. He has threatened Plaintiff and the minor children causing them to fear for their safety. Defendant's repeated threats toward the minor children has caused them and the Plaintiff great fear and anxiety about Defendant's impending return to South Carolina. Plaintiff is informed and believes that she is entitled to an ex parte restraining order as well as restraining order, pendente lite and permanently, enjoining the Defendant from harming, harassing, threatening, abusing, contacting, or coming about the Plaintiff or any member of her houshold. Plaintiff asks that this Court grant her the same.

15. Upon information and belief Defendant has recently withdrawn and squandered his retirement from the Toro Company, an extremely valuable marital asset. Defendant is now threatening to sell the marital residence where the Plaintiff and minor children live. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the Defendant should be restrained from disposing of, encumbering, or dissipating any marital assests during the pendency of this action and that he should further be restrained from incurring any indebtedness in the Plaintiff's name or in joint names of the parties, or from changing any policies or beneficiaries of life, hazard, health, automobile, dental or other insurance, as well as all accounts and asks that this Court issue a restraining order enjoining the Defendant from such conduct.

16. Plaintiff is in need of discovery to adequately prepared her case for trial. Plaintiff asks that this Court grant her discovery pursuant to the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure and the South Carolina Rules of Family Court.

17. Due to the wrongful conduct of the Defendant, Plaintiff has been forced to retain an attorney to protect herself and the minor children. Plaintiff is without funds to pay her attorney and is in need of attorney's fees from the Defendant. Plaintiff asks that this Court grant her attorney's fees and costs of Defendant. Plaintiff asks that this Court grant her atorney's fees and costs of action, pendente lite and permanently asks that this Court grant her the same.

WHEREFORE, having fully set forth her complaint, Plaintiff prays for an Order of this Court granting her the following relief:

A. A divorce a vinculo matrimonii based upon the statutory grounds of continuous separation for one year;

B. Custody of the minor childrfen, pendente lite and permanently;

C. An order denying visitation to the Defendant, pendente lite and permanently;

D. Alimony, pendente lite and permanently;

E. Child support, pendente lite and permanently;

F. Equitable division of the marital property and debts, pendente lite and permanently;

G. Order allowing the Clerk of Court to transfer title to any property awarded to her if the Defendant refuses to do so;

H. Temporary possession of former marital residence;

I. An order requiring Defendant to return the permanent alien cards and passports of Vanessa Yamel Hallman, Cody Jasmine Hallman, Hadasseh Helena Hallman and Arthur Bruce Hallman;

J. Ex parte restraining order;

K. Restraining order, pendente lite and permanently;

L. Restraining order on marital assets;

M. Discovery;

N. Attorney's fees and costs of action, pendente lite and permanently;

O. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

___________________________________________________

PERSONALLY appeared before me, Anaith Hallman, who first duly sworn, desposes and says that:

1. I have read the allergations contained in the complaint.

2. The complaint was prepared by my attorney based upon information that I personally furnished to my attorney.

3. The allegations contained in the complaint are true and correct, and are based upon my personal knowledge except for those allegations which are based on my information and belief and as to those I believe them to be true.

___________________________________________________

TO: Defendant, Arthur B. Hallman, Sr.:

You will please take notice that Plaintiff hereby moves for an order of this Court granting her the following temporary relief.

(a) Custody;

(b) An order denying visitation to the Defendant;

(c) Alimony;

(d) Child support;

(e) Temporary possession of the former marital residence;

(f) Restraining order;

(g) Restraining order on marital assets;

(h) Discovery;

(i) Attorney's Fees;

This motion is based on the pleadings, financial declarations, affidavits and such other evidence as may be submitted at the hearing of this matter.

___________________________________________________

PERSONALLY appeared before me, Anaith D. Hallman, who first being duly sworn deposes and says that:

1. My adopted child, Hadassah Hedena Hallman, currently lives with me at 2289 Pleasant Grove Road, Loris, South Carolina. In the last five years she has also lived with her father at 3901 Hercules, Apartment #16, El Paso, Texas.

2. The only other action I have participated in where custody of my child was an issue was the adoption action, Arthur Bruce Hallman and Anaith Delores Hallman vs. Hadassah Helena Hallman Samudio and John Doe, 86-DR-26-884.

3. I have no knowledge of any other custody proceeding concerning my child pending in any court in South Carolina or any other state.

4. The only other person who might claim to have custody or visitation rights is the Defendent.

___________________________________________________

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Plaintiff above named claims an equitable lien and/or interest in the properties below of which the Defendant may have some interest therin. The location of the property is:

ALL THAT CERTAIN real estate described in a deed recorded in the Horry County RMC Office in Deed Book 114, at page 109 on June 17, 1987. The tax map number is 087-00-04-025.

This property is located at 2289 Pleasant Grove Road, Loris, South Carolina.

___________________________________________________

In regards to Anaith D. Hallman vs. Arthur B. Hallman, Sr., 00-DR-26-2802, the following is the Answer of the defendant (Arthur B. Hallman, Sr.) to the Complaint of the plaintiff (Anaith D. Hallman):

Complaint #1: No contest.

Complaint #2: Contest - defendant is a resident of the state of Texas, however his primary residency is 2289 Pleasant Grove Road, Loris, South Carolina.

Complaint #3: Contest - the parties were married on October 3, 1975. However on December 1993, at their marital residence of 2289 Pleasant Grove Road, Loris, South Carolina, the parties did not agree to separate without cohabitation until the present time. The separation that occurred was agreed upon in good faith by the Defendant as a temporary measure until proper housing could be located in Texas wherein the Plaintiff and four (4) remaining children would then relocate to Texas in order for the separated family members to reunite as one family unit.

Complaint #4: No contest.

Complaint #5: Contest - six children were adopted into this marriage. However out of the six adopted children only Luis Albert Hallman, Marta Elizabeth Hallman, and Felix Gonzalez Hallman have been emancipated. The two children Vanessa Yamel Hallman and Cody Jasmine Hallman are not emancipated and are temporarily living out of the country as a direct result of the Plaintiff's very negative influence on their lives.

Complaint #6: Contest - plaintiff has not always been the primary caregiver of the minor children. Out of the approximate seven (7) years of our unplanned separation, five (5) of the seven (7) minor children spent several years each with their father (Defendant) in a loving and close family environment in Texas. Futhermore, the Plaintiff does not have a warm and nurturing relationship with the two (2) minor children Hadassah Helena Hallman and Arthur Bruce Hallman, Jr., nor did she ever have a warm and nurturing relationship with Felix Gonzalez Hallman, Marta Elizabeth Hallman, Cody Jasmine Hallman, and Vanessa Yamel Hallman. The Plaintiff is not informed and it is not in the best interest of the four (4) minor children Cody Jasmine Hallman, Vanessa Yamel Hallman, Hadassah Helena Hallman, and Arthur Bruce Hallman, Jr., that she be granted custody.

Complaint #7: Contest - the Defendant has not repeatedly or ever mistreated the children when they were in his care by refusing to feed them. The Defendant has gone without food at times in order to insure the minor children were fed. This situation was a direct result of financial hardships in which the Plaintiff was not only aware of, but also had the resources to financially assist but however refused. The Defendant has never refused to allow Hadassah to use her inhaler to treat her asthma. The Defendant has always encouraged Hadassah to use her inhaler to treat her asthma. The Defendant has always encouraged Hadassah to use her own spiritual judgment when deciding how often and when to use her inhaler. It is not in the best interest of the minor children that the Plaintiff be given custody. The Defendant is therefore requesting custody of the minor children.

Complaint #8: Contest - throughout the entire marriage, the Defendant has encouraged the Plaintiff to remain unemployed in order to completely devote her time to the children. However during our approximate seven (7) year separation, the Plaintiff through self will has not only earned a salary through gainful employment but also established and prospered in her own business. Therefore, the Defendant contests the Plaintiff's request for alimony.

Complaint #9: Contest - the Plaintiff should not be entitled to custody of the minor children and therefore child support would not be needed. The defendant desires custody of the minor children and the appropriate child support from the Plaintiff.

Complaint #10: Contest - throughout the marriage the parties have acquired marital property and debts, however during the approximate last seven (7) years of the mariage, the Plaintiff chose to abandon the marriage and family unit. Therefore the equitable division of the marital property and debts must reflect the approximate last seven (7) years whereas the Defendant was misled by the Plaintiff's genuine motive concerning the family.

Complaint #11: Contest - the Defendant has always shown the highest concern for his family and respect for authority, even to the point of risking his reputation for their safety. The Plaintiff is uninformed if she believes that the Defendant would refuse to execute any documents necessary to transfer property to her if the Court were to award her marital property. It is therefore not necessary that the Plaintiff ask the Court to allow the Clerk of Court, in the alternative, to execute a deed transfering any property awarded to her.

Complaint #12: Contest - the Defendant has lived in Texas for approximately the past seven (7) years awaiting the Plaintiff to fulfill her promise to relocate, however the minor children have only lived in the former marital residence with the Plaintiff for a partial amount of those approximate seven (7) years. The Plaintiff and the minor children are presently living in the former marital residence and may continue to do so without the Court having to grant her temporary possession of it.

Complaint #13: Contest - for the children's protection and safety, the Defendant has maintained possession of the permanent alien cards for Cody Jasmine Hallman, Vanessa Yamel Hallman, Hadassah Helena Hallman, and Arthur Bruce Hallman, Jr. The Defendant requests the permanent alien cards and passports remain in his possession until child custody is determined.

Complaint #14: Contest - the Defendant does not have a violent temper and has not instilled great fear and anxiety in either the minor children or the Plaintiff through threats. And furthermore the Defendant has neither planned to visit South Carolina in the immediate future nor has he informed anyone, including the minor children, that he would do so. It is the intent of the Defendant to remain in Texas until the Plaintiff fulfills her agreed upon move to Texas. The stated fear and anxiety of the minor children is a direct result of the very negative influence of the Plaintiff.

Complaint #15: Contest - the information and belief of the Plaintiff that the Defendant's retirement from The Toro Company has been squandered is totally unfounded. The Plaintiff was informed of and agreed to withdrawal of said retirement for temporary subsistence until gainful employment could be reinstated. The Defendant is not now threatening to sell the marital residence where the Plaintiff and minor children live. It is and has been the desire of the Defendant to develop the properties in question for the long-term benefit of the entire Hallman family.

Complaint #16: Contest - the Plaintiff's case is based on untruths and suppositions, theefore no discovery should be provided to perpetuate such unjust accusations in a court trial.

Complaint #17: The Plaintiff's case is based on untruths and suppositions, therefore no funds should be provided as attorney's fees.

___________________________________________________

This matter was set for the roster call on June 18, 2001 at 2:15 p.m. The baliff sounded the hall at the time, and the Defendant did not respond. The matter was set for final hearing at noon on the above date. Again the baliff sounded the hall, and Defendant did not respond. Plaintiff, her attorney and the court-appointed Guardian ad Litem were present at the call of the final hearing.

A review of the court file showed that this action was commenced by the filing of a summons, complaint, motion for temporary relief and order franting an ex parte restraining order on September 29, 2000. Defendant was personally served with all these pleadings on November 3, 2000 with the affidavit of personal service having been filed with the Clerk of Court on November 14, 2000. At the temporary hearing on November 21, 2000 Anita R. Floyd appeared on behalf of the Defendant and was relieved as his counsel on February 20, 2001. The Court appointed John L. Sherrill as Guardian ad Litem for the minor child on January 25, 2001. The Defendant filed a Pro Se answer on April 4, 2001. Plaintiff's attorney acknowledged to the Court that Defendant had served his answer on her prior to the expiration of thirty (30) days from service of the summons and complaint.

In a letter to this Court dated June 10, 2001, Defendant requested that the final hearing in this matter be continued to allow him time to resolve a fee dispute with his former attorney in this action. I find that this motion has no merit and deny Defendant's request for a continuance.

Based upon the pleadings, financial declaration of the Plaintiff, testimony and other evidence submitted at the trial of this case, the Court makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Plaintiff is a resident of Horry County, South Carolina, and has been for more than one year prior to the commencement of this action.

2. Defendant is a resident of the state of Texas.

3. The parties last lived together as husband and wife in Horry County, South Carolina.

4. The parties were married on October 3, 1995. They separated in 1993 and have lived separate and without cohabitation since that time. Plaintiff's witness corrobrated the period of separation.

5. The Court inquired of the Plaintiff whether there was any possibility of reconciliation and she denyed the same. I find that there is no possibility of reconciliation.

6. Six children were adopted into this marriage:

A. Luis Albert Hallman, date of birth ___.
B. Marta Elizabeth Hallman, date of birth ___.
C. Vanessa Yamel Hallman, date of birth ___.
D. Cody Jasmine Hallman, date of birth ___.
E. Felix Gonzalez Hallman, date of birth ___.
F. Hadassah Helena Hallman, date of birth ___.

At the time of the filing of this action, Vanessa Yamel Hallman was a minor. She has since turned eighteen (18) years old and her custody is no longer an issue.The only child who has not been emancipated is Hadassah Helena Hallman. She is the only child who's custody is at issue in this acton.

7. Plaintiff has always been the primary caregiver of the minor child. She is the one who has provided her medical care, taken her to school, prepared her meals and provided all her other needs. The child attends North Myrtle Beach Christian School, is making good grades, and is involved in extra curricular activities including playing on the basketball team.

8. Defendant's relationship with the minor child is not a healthy one. When the minor child visited with the Defendant in the summer of 1999, he did not properly care for her by refusing to allow her to have medical treatment in the form of her inhaler to treat her asthma. Defendant has sent many letters to the minor child and the Plaintiff with threats that they are going to hell and are being controlled by demons if they do not conform their behavior to his standards. After a telephone call to the minor child in January 2001, she cut her wrist. The Plaintiff has provided the child with counseling at Waccamaw Mental Health to deal with her depression and fear as a result of this situation. I find it is in the best interest of the minor child for the Plaintiff to be granted custody. Plaintiff is granted custody of the minor child, Hadassah Helena Hallman.

9. Although Defendant filed a Pro Se answer, he has failed to cooperate with the Guardian ad Litem. He has further failed to appear and present any evidence as to why he should be granted custody or visitation with the minor child. I find that under these circumstances he is not entitled to any visitation. However, he may petition the Court for visitation in the future.

10. As custodial parent, Plaintiff is entitled to all documents necessary to provide for the minor child and conduct business on her behalf, including her birth certificate, permanent ailen card, and passport. defendant shall immediately return the original documents to the Plaintiff; however, he may certainly make photocpies for his own records.

11. Defendant graduated from Clemson University and with a degree in engineering. Defendant has failed to respond to Plaintiff's request for admission and, therefore, admitted that he is capable of earing at least $79,000 per year. Defendant is in good health and is capable of continuing to earn that amount of money. He lost his job with Toro, Inc. due to his own wrongfull conduct. Plaintiff's witness testified that Defendant had admitted to him that he had voluntarily chosen not to pursue certain job opportunities because he was waiting for God to give him his old job back. When he was fired from his last job, he received six months of his salary as severance pay. He has always been the primary wage earner of the family.

12. Plaintiff lacks a high school education. She testified that several times throughout the marriage she wanted to get her GED, but Defendant insisted that she stay home with the children and he would take care of the family financially. Plaintiff is originally from Panama. Her English is a second language. She has limited job skills. The kinds of jobs that she has had in the past have been manual labor such as working on a farm, kitchen helper in restaurants and housekeeping in hotels. Her earning potential is very limited.

13. This marriage is the first for both parties. There are no prior support orders for either party.

14. Defendant moved to Texas in 1993. The parties had planned for him to get established and then send for the Plaintiff and minor children; however, Plaintiff refused to allow the family to move to Texas with him. Plaintiff's witness testified that he questioned Defendant several times about when he was going to send for the family. Defendant's response was that God had not told him to send for them yet.

15. Plaintiff is currently working as a housekeeper at The Blue Water Inn and earning approximately $943 per month in gross income. This amount includes income from cleaning condominiums at $120 per month. Plaintiff's work is seasonal; therefore, this gross income represents an average. I find that Plaintiff is working up to her earning potential.

16. Plaintiff does not have any work related childcare cost. The children do not have health insurance nor do they any extraordinary medical expenses. I impute to the Defendant an income of $6,583 per month. According to Plaintiff's financial declaration, Plaintiff's monthly income is $943 per month. Defendant's child support obligation under the South Carolina Child Support Guidelines is $779 per month. A copy of the child support worksheet is attached and incorporated herein by reference. Defendant shall pay Plaintiff child support in the amount of $779 commencing July 1, 2001 and payable on the first of each and every month thereafter. He shall pay this sum through the Horry County Clerk of Court plus the attendant three per cent (3%) service charge for a total monthly payment of $802.37. He may mail to Horry County Clerk of Court, Post Office Box 677, Conway, SC 29528- 0677.

17. There is a substantial evidence that Defendant withdrew $84,371.27 from his Toro, Inc. retirement account; however, this withdrawal was in December 1999. Plaintiff has requested lump sum alimony in the amount of $49,000. this sum represents alimony of $350 per month for one hundred forty (140) months. This time span is the time period until Defendant will turn sixty-five (65) years old and be eligible for Social Security benefits. There is no evidence that the Defendant still has the money that he withdrew from the retirement account. On the contrary the only evidence before this Court of any actual cash that Defendant has is $4,000 on Plaintiff's financial declaration. Without evidence of present ability to pay lump sum alimony, I must deny Plaintiff's request for such.

18. However, Plaintiff is entitled to alimony in the sum of $350 per month which is a reasonable amount. Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff $350 per month as alimony commencing July 1, 2001. Subsequent payments shall be due on the 1st of each and every month thereafter. Defendant shall make these payments through the Horry County Clerk of Court with the three (3%) percent service charge for a total monthly payment of $360.50. He may mail payment to Horry County Clerk of Court, Post Office Box 677, Conway, SC 29528- 0677.

19. The Parties own a farm in Loris, South Carolina. Plats of these farms were submitted into evidence at the hearing of this matter. I find that this farm can be roughly divided in kind into two approximately equal portions with regard to fair market value by a canal ditch running from a point on Plaintiff's Exhibit #1 on S.C. Highway 349 bordering on the land of Marion Rowell running South 16 degrees 40 minutes East curving behind the fruit trees into the woods and ending at Run of Cowpens Swamp. Additionally the parties own a 1973 mobile home. Plaintiff and her witness testified that the mobile home is in very poor condition. I assign it no value. Plaintiff is granted the tract of land set out on Plaintiff's Exhibit #1 and the Defendant is granted the tract of land set out on Plaintiff's Exhibit #2. Copies of both of these exhibits are attached to this order and incorporated herein by reference. The boundary line between the two parties' land is the ditch running from a point on Plaintiff's Exhibit #1 on S.C. Highway 349 bordering on the land of Marion Rowell running South 16 degrees 40 minutes East curving behind the fruit trees into the woods and ending at Run of Cowpens Swamp. The Plaintiff shall convey all right, title and interest in the tract of land set out on Plaintiff's Exhibit #2 to the Defendant. The defendant shall convey all right, title and interest in the tract of land set out on Plaintiff's Exhibit #1 to the Plaintiff.

20. Defendant has repeatedly threatened Plaintiff thus causing her to fear for her safety. I find that a permanent restraining order is the appropriate relief for the Plaintiff. defendant is restrained and enjoined from harming, harassing, threatening, contacting or coming about the Plaintiff directly or indirectly either personally or through an agent at any place whatsoever.

21. This is an appropriate case for an award of attorney's fees. In determining this award I have considered the factors as outlined in the case of Glasscock vs. Glasscock 304 S.C. 158, 403 S.E.2d 313 (1991) and the case of E.D.M. vs. T.A.M. 307 S.C. 471, 415 S.E.2d 812 (1992) as follows:

A. The parties' ability to pay their own attorney's fees: The Defendant has a greater ability to pay his attorney's fees than Plaintiff has to pay her attorney's fees.

B. Beneficial results obtained by the attorney: Plaintiff has prevailed on the issue of custody of the parties' minor child. A significant portion of the attorney's fees were incurred regarding the issue of custody.

C. The parties' respective financial conditions: Plaintiff's financial condition is barely on a subsistence level. The evidence presented was that Defendant has chosen not to be earning up to his income potential and is certainly in a better position to earn substantial income.

D. The effect of the attorney's fees on each parties' standard of living: The attorneys fees award will have less impact upon the Defendant's standard of living than not awarding them would have upon the Plaintiff's standard of living.

E. The nature, extent, and difficulty of the case: This case required a great deal of investigation and development of the evidence. defendant refused to cooperate with Plaintiff's efforts in discovery and refused to cooperate with the Guardian ad Litem.

F. The time necessary devoted to the case: The time devoted to this case in preparation was appropriate.

G. Professional standing of counsel: Plaintiff's attorney is an experienced Family Court attorney in good standing among the bench and bar.

H. Contingency of compnsation: Plaintiff's attorney fees will likely not be discharged without an award of fees.

I. Beneficial results obtained: Plaintiff prevailed on all issues in this case.

J. Customary legal fees for similar services: The attorney's fees charged are well within the customary range of legal fees for similar services in this area.

22. An award of $4,414.85 in attorney's fees is appropriate. Defendant is ordered to pay directly to Plaintiff's attorney $4,414.85 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order.

23. The Guardian ad Litem for the minor child conducted an extensive investigation on her behalf. He interviewed not only the child and the parties on more than one occasion, he also reviewed numerous documents provided by the parties. He attempted to contact all of the minor child's siblings. The Guardian ad Litem has provided valuiable assistance to this Court in determining the issues of custody and visitation. He has incurred fees and expenses in the amount of $1,589.69. Plaintiff has paid $220 as temporary Guardian fees. Defendant has paid nothing. I find that Defendant shall pay $1,000 as Guardian ad Litem fees directly to the Guardian ad Litem within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff shall be responsible for $589.69 of the Guardian fees. Having already paid $200, she shall pay her balance of $389.69 directly to the Guardian ad Litem within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order.

24. Defendant has shown utter disregard for this Court's Order by ignoring the Temporary Order to pay unallocated support to the plaintiff and the minor child. therefore Defendant's obligation to pay Guardian ad Litem fees and attorney's fees for the Plaintiff shall be secured by a lien on the share of marital property awarded to him in Paragraph 19. The Guardian ad Litem, John L. Sherrill, is granted a lien in the amount of $1,000 on the Defendant's share of the marital property. Plaintiff's attorney, Deborah B. Dantzler, is granted a lien in the amount of $4,414.85 on the Defendant's share of the marital property.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The Court has jurisdiction in this matter and venue is proper.

2. The relief set out in the Findings of Fact should be granted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:

A. Plaintiff is granted a divorce a vinculo matrimonii based upon the statutory grounds of continuous separation for one year;

B. The relief set out in the Findings of Facts is hereby make the order of this Court;

AND IT IS SO ORDERED!

___________________________________________________

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that in the above-captioned proceeding filed in the family court in Horry County, South Carolina, a judgment was entered against Arthur Bruce Hallman, Sr., the Defendant, in this action on June 2, 2001, in the amount of $4,414.85, for an award of attorney's fees to be paid to Deborah B. Dantzler Anaith Hallman. Attorneys of record are Deborah B. Dantzler, representing the Plaintiff and John L. Sherrill serving as Guardian ad Litem for the minor child. Defendant was pro se.

FURTHER NOTICE IS GIVEN that interest will accrue at the statutory rate from the August 7, 2001.

___________________________________________________

Go to Annie's Arrest Warrant!

Go to Bruce's Divorce Time-Line!