USHA BRIDGES While there’s still some leeway as to what constitutes a longterm marriage in South Carolina, a recent ruling from the state Supreme Court made one thing clear.

When a long-term marriage ends in divorce, according to the ruling, a Family Court doesn’t necessarily have to divide assets on a 50/50 basis.

The ruling, which was the first Supreme Court ruling of 2010, stemmed from a case in Cherokee County Family Court and the work of two local attorneys, Usha Bridges and Bill Rhoden, who represented a woman in a divorce case.

In that case, the Family Court divided a couple’s assets with 60 percent going to the wife and 40 percent going to the husband. The decision was appealed by the husband and the state Court of Appeals said the 60/40 split was an abuse of discretion, saying instead the assets should have been split 50/50.

On subsequent appeal to the state Supreme Court, however, the high court ruled the Family Court’s decision on the division of property was permissible and within its discretion.

BILL RHODEN “I think it’s interesting from the standpoint,” Rhoden said, “often times we do tell our clients if you’ve been married 20 or 25 or 30 years, the court in all probability will split property 50/50.”

He added, “I don’t know if the (Supreme Court) opinion changes that, but you may have to look at the facts a little more closely. There may be a good reason not to divide 50/50.”

In the local case that resulted in the Supreme Court ruling, Rhoden said the wife was awarded more of the property because she took on all of the couple’s debts.

“It certainly wouldn’t be right to saddle one party with all the debt without giving them a benefit,” Rhoden said.

In its ruling, the state Supreme Court said: “We take no issue with the proposition that an equal division of property will often be ‘appropriate.’ We further agree that a 50% - 50% division would be appropriate here. But that does not make the 60%- 40% division inappropriate or an abuse of discretion.”

The state’s high court said the typical 50/50 split was meant “to foster amicable resolutions in family court matters” but noted that “what was intended as guidance on an ‘appropriate’ division has seemingly mutated into a mandatory division.”

A 50/50 split is not mandated, the Supreme Court decided.

“I thought the Supreme Court was absolutely correct,” Attorney Bridges offered. “I actually was surprised at the Court of Appeals ruling in that South Carolina law is very clear the rulings of a trial court judge will not be interrupted short of an abuse of power. In this case, Judge (Georgia) Anderson did not rush to judgment. She pondered over the evidence and issued a fair and just verdict.”

Attorney Bridges will get to put this ruling into action in coming months and years as she was unanimously elected by members of the South Carolina Senate and House on Wednesday as Cherokee County’s new Family Court Judge.