THISOPINIONHASNOPRECEDENTIALVALUE.ITSHOULDNOTBECITEDORRELIED ONASPRECEDENTINANYPROCEEDINGEXCEPTASPROVIDEDBYRULE268(d)(2), SCACR. THESTATEOFSOUTHCAROLINA InTheCo ofAppeal StellaK.Black,Appellant, v. HaroldWhitneyBlack,Respondent. AppealfromRichlandCounty JamesF.Fraley,Jr.,FamilyCourtJudge UnpublishedOpinionNo.2010UP196 HeardSeptember1,2009FiledMarch8,2010 AFFIRMED JanWarner,ofColumbia,forAppellant.

KermitKing,MaryKatherineSherman,Rebecca West,andTinaCundari,allofColumbia,for Respondent. PERCURIAM:Inthisappealofadivorcedecree,StellaBlack(Wife)allegeserrorinthefamily court'sdecisionsregardingfindingsoffact,alimony,transmutation,valuationofassets, attorney'sfees,maritalfault,lifeinsurance,andthedisqualificationofHaroldWhitneyBlack's (Husband's)attorney.Weaffirm. FACTS HusbandandWifeweremarriedonJanuary6,1994.Eachhadbeenmarriedbefore,and neitherhadchildrenfromtheirrespectivepriormarriages,norwereanychildrenbornofthis marriage. In1972,HusbandincorporatedWhitAshFurnishings,Inc.,aretailbusinesssellingfurnitureand homeaccessoriesinwhichheisa51%shareholder.Husbandalsoowns49%ofTheBurton Agency,LLP,whichownsrealestate,someofwhichisrentedtoWhitAsh. Wifeallegesthatbetweenthefallof1991andtheparties'marriagein1994,sheperformeda

numberofservicesthatpurportedlyresultedineconomicbenefitstoHusbandandhisinterests inWhitAshandBurton.Aftertheirmarriage,Wifemaintainssheinitiatedjewelryandgiftsales atWhitAsh,handledtelevisionandotheradvertising,engagedincommunityactivities,anddid buyingforthebusiness.HusbandcontendsWifedidnothaveapositioninthebusiness, performednodaytodayresponsibilities,wenttothestoreonlysporadically,andwhen occasionallytravellingwithotherWhitAshemployeestojewelrymarkets,wouldbuyitemsfor herselfinsteadofthestore. In2003,Wifeembarkedonacareerinthemusicbusiness.AccordingtoWife,Husbandfunded herefforts,deductedthelossesontheparties'personalincometaxreturns,andhadattorney RebeccaWest,whohadbeenhisandWhitAsh'spersonalattorney,assistwithherendeavors. Inaddition,withHusband'sconsent,otherWhitAshemployeesassistedWifewithcomputer work,travelarrangements,andothertasksassociatedwithherpursuitofamusiccareer. In2001,discordinthemarriagebegantoescalateandHusbandtemporarilyleftthemarital residence.Uponhisreturn,Wifeallegedlybecamemoreverballyabusivetowardhimandin October2005,thepartieshadaphysicalaltercation,afterwhichHusbandleftthemarital residencepermanently. OnJanuary17,2006,Wifecommencedthisaction,seekingseparatemaintenanceandsupport, includingsecurityforsupport,equitabledivision,afindingthatcertainassetsHusbandacquired beforethemarriagehadbeentransmutedorthatWifewasentitledtoaspecialequityinthem, andattorney'sfeesandcosts.HusbanddeniedWife'sallegationsandcounterclaimedfora divorceonthegroundofadulteryandabartoWifereceivingalimony. ThefamilycourtissuedatemporaryorderonMay30,2006,(1)findingHusbandhadnot establishedaprimafaciecaseofadultery(2)awardingWifetemporaryalimonyof$9,000per monthandexclusivepossessionofthemaritalhomeand(3)orderingHusbandtomaintain healthcoverageforWife,paythemortgage,taxes,andinsuranceonthemaritalhome,and advance$30,000asWife'ssuitmoneyandtemporaryattorney'sfees. Duringthependencyofthisaction,WifesoughtunsuccessfullytodisqualifyattorneyRebecca WestfromappearingonHusband'sbehalfonthegroundthatWesthadpreviouslyrepresented herwhensheattemptedtoestablishherselfinthemusicbusiness. Inthefinaldecree,filedMarch4,2008,thefamilycourtgrantedWifeadivorceonthegroundof aoneyear'scontinuousseparation,findingneitherpartywasentitledtoadivorcebasedonfault grounds.Inaddition,thefamilycourtawardedWifepermanentalimonyof$5,500permonthand requiredHusbandtosecurethisawardwith$1.5milliondollarsinlifeinsurance.Furthermore, thefamilycourtdeclinedtofindthatHusband'sinterestsinbothWhitAshandBurtonhadbeen transmutedintomaritalpropertyorthatWifewasentitledtoaspecialequityineitherasset.Wife receivedthemaritalresidencesubjecttothemortgageonthepropertyandwasdirectedtopay Husband$41,000attherateof$1,000permonthfromheralimony.Wifealsoreceivedan additional$45,000inattorney'sfeesandcosts. Bothpartiesfiledposttrialmotions.Inresponsetothemotions,thecourtamendeditsorderto reflectWife'scorrectdateofbirth.ThecourtalsoreducedtheamountoflifeinsuranceHusband

wastocarrytosecurehisalimonyobligationfrom$1.5millionto$750,000.OnMarch31,2008, Wifefiledanoticeofappeal.[1] STANDARDOFREVIEW "Adivorceactionisamatterinequityheardbythefamilycourtjudgeonappeal,thecourt's scopeofreviewextendstothefindingoffactsbasedonitsownviewofthepreponderanceof theevidence."Thomsonv.Thomson,377S.C.613,619,661S.E.2d130,133(Ct.App.2008) (citingMcLaughlinv.McLaughlin,283S.C.404,40506,323S.E.2d781,782(1984)). "However,ourbroadscopeofreviewdoesnotrequireustodisregardthefindingsofthefamily courtortoignorethefactthatthetrialjudgesawandheardthewitnessesandwasinabetter positiontoevaluatetheircredibilityandassigncomparativeweighttotheirtestimony."Id.(citing Tinsleyv.Tinsley,326S.C.374,380,483S.E.2d198,201(Ct.App.1997)). LAW/ANALYSIS 1.Wifearguesthefamilycourt'sfindingoffactsareinerrorbecausethecourtfailedtogivedue considerationtoHusband'sallegedmaritalfaultandlackofcredibility.Wedisagree. CitingMcCrossonv.Tanenbaum,375S.C.225,652S.E.2d73(Ct.App.2007),Wifearguesthe familycourtimproperlyignoredordiscountedevidencethatHusband,withtheassistanceof othersinthecasewovea"webofdeceit"and"engagedinacampaignofegregious concealment,complication,andoutandoutlyinginanefforttoattempttoobtainafinancial advantageinthiscase.""However,ourbroadscopeofreviewdoesnotrequireustodisregard thefindingsofthefamilycourtortoignorethefactthatthetrialjudgesawandheardthe witnessesandwasinabetterpositiontoevaluatetheircredibilityandassigncomparative weighttotheirtestimony."Thomson,377S.C.at619,661S.E.2dat133.Webelievethe supremecourt'sexpressdiscreditingofthiscourt'sstatementinMcCrossonaboutareviewing court'sadvantageinanemotionallychargedtrialisinitselfsufficientreasontodefertothe familycourthowever,wealsoagreewithHusbandthatanymisconductonhispartduringthe litigationpalesincomparisonwiththatinMcCrosson.SeeMcCrossonv.Tanenbaum,383S.C. 150,151,679S.E.2d172,172(2009)(explainingthecourtofappeals'decision"improperly implie[d]thatthefamilycourtwas'distractedbyanemotionallychargedtrial'").Accordingly,we findnoerroronthepartofthefamilycourt. 2.WifearguesthefamilycourterredinawardingWifepermanentalimonyofonly$5,500per month.Wedisagree. "Anawardofalimonyrestswithinthesounddiscretionoffamilycourtandwillnotbedisturbed absentanabuseofdiscretion."Craigv.Craig,365S.C.285,292,617S.E.2d359,362(2005). "Generally,alimonyshouldplacethesupportedspouse,asnearlyaspractical,inthesame positionasenjoyedduringthemarriage."Id. Thelegislaturehassetforthtwelvefactorsforafamilycourttoconsiderindeterminingan alimonyaward.Thesefactorsincludedurationofthemarriage,thephysicalandemotional healthoftheparties,theparties'education,theirworkexperienceandearningpotentials,the standardoflivingestablishedduringthemarriage,currentandreasonablyanticipated

expenses,maritalandnonmaritalpropertiesoftheparties,andmaritalmisconductorfault.S.C. CodeAnn.203130(C)(Supp.2009). Asthefamilycourtproperlyaddressedthestatutoryalimonyfactors,wedefertothediscretionof thefamilycourtandfindnoerrorwiththealimonyaward. 3.WifearguesthefamilycourterredindecliningtofindHusband'sinterestsinWhitAshand Burtonweretransmutedintomaritalpropertyor,inthealternative,thatshewasentitledto specialequityinterestsintheseassets.Wedisagree. Maritalpropertyisdefinedas"allrealandpersonalpropertywhichhasbeenacquiredbythe partiesduringthemarriageandwhichisownedasofthedateoffilingorcommencementof maritallitigation."S.C.CodeAnn.203630(Supp.2009).Excludedfrommaritalpropertyis "propertyacquiredbyeitherpartybeforethemarriage."Id.Nonmaritalpropertycanbe consideredtohavetransmutedintomaritalproperty"'(1)ifitbecomessocommingledwith maritalpropertyastobeuntraceable(2)ifitistitledjointlyor(3)ifitisutilizedbythepartiesin supportofthemarriageorinsomeothermannersoastoevidenceanintentbythepartiesto makeitmaritalproperty."Thomson,377S.C.at620,661S.E.2dat133(quotingJohnsonv. Johnson,296S.C.289,295,372S.E.2d107,110(Ct.App.1998)."Theburdenisonthe spouseclaimingtransmutationtoproduceobjectiveevidencethatthepartiesconsideredthe propertytobemaritalduringthemarriage."Pirriv.Pirri,369S.C.258,270,631S.E.2d279,286 (Ct.App.2006).Evidenceoftransmutationmayincludeplacingthepropertyinjointnames, transferringthepropertytotheotherspouseasagift,usingthepropertyexclusivelyformarital purposes,comminglingthepropertywithmaritalproperty,usingmaritalfundstobuildequityin theproperty,orexchangingthepropertyformaritalproperty.Johnson,296S.C.at295,372 S.E.2dat11011.Mereuseoftheincomefromaspouse'sseparatepropertyinsupportofthe marriagedoesnottransmutethepropertyintoamaritalasset.Pirri,369S.C.at270,631S.E.2d at286. Uponreviewoftherecordwefindtheevidencesupportsthefamilycourt'srulingthatthenon maritalpropertydidnottransmute.Accordingly,weaffirmtherulingofthefamilycourt. 4.WifearguesthefamilycourterredinitsvaluationofHusband'sinterestsinWhitAshand Burton.Wedisagree. Afamilycourtmayacceptthevaluationofonepartyoveranother,andthecourtsvaluationof maritalpropertywillbeaffirmedifitiswithintherangeofevidencepresented. Pirri,at264,631 S.E.2dat283.Wefindthefamilycourt'svaluationtobewithintherangeofevidence presented. Moreover,weareinclinedtoagreewithHusbandthat,inasmuchasWifehasnotarguedthatthe familycourt'sallegedlyerroneousvaluationsofthebusinessesledtoothererrors,thisissueis ofnoconsequence.SeeMilesv.Miles,303S.C.33,36,397S.E.2d790,792(Ct.App.1990) (recognizinganoverridingrulethat"whateverdoesn'tmakeadifference,doesn'tmatter"). 5.Wifearguessheshouldhavereceivedalargerawardofattorney'sfeesandcosts.We disagree.

Thefamilycourtmayawardreasonableattorney'sfeesandcostsbasedon"thefinancial resourcesandmaritalfaultofbothparties."S.C.CodeAnn.203130(H)(Supp.2009). Attorney'sfeesawardsarewithinthefamilycourt'sdiscretion.Upchurchv.Upchurch,367S.C. 16,28,624S.E.2d643,648(2008)."Indeterminingthereasonableamountofattorneysfeesto award,thecourtshouldconsiderthenature,extent,anddifficultyoftheservicesrendered,the timenecessarilydevotedtothecase,counsel'sprofessionalstanding,thecontingencyof compensation,thebeneficialresultsobtained,andcustomaryfeesforsimilarservices." Robersonv.Roberson,359S.C.384,392,597S.E.2d840,844(Ct.App.2004).Herewefind thefamilycourt'sawardofattorney'sfeestobewithinitsdiscretion. 6.Wifearguessheisentitledtoadivorcebasedonthegroundofdesertion.Wedisagree. Aspouseseekingadivorceonthegroundofdesertionmustshow"(1)cessationfrom cohabitationfor...oneyear(2)intentonthepartoftheabsentingpartynottoresumeit(3) absenceoftheopposingparty'sconsentand(4)absenceofjustification."Fortv.Fort,270S.C. 255,259,241S.E.2d891,893(1978)."Wherethedepartingspousehasjustcauseforleaving, herdoingsodoesnotconstitutedesertion."Smithv.Smith,260S.C.65,67,194S.E.2d199 (1973). Wefindthefactssupportthefamilycourt'srefusaltoawardadivorceonthegroundsof desertion. 7.WifearguesthefamilycourterredinreducingtheamountoflifeinsurancethatHusbandwas tomaintaintosecurehisalimonyobligation.Wedisagree. Undersection203130(D)oftheSouthCarolinaCode(Supp.2008),thefamilycourt"may makeprovisionforsecurityforthepayment"ofspousalsupport,and,inconjunctionwiththis provision,maydirectasupportingspouse"tocarryandmaintainlifeinsurancesoastoassure supportofaspousebeyondthedeathofthepayorspouse."Inthisregard,theremustbesome evidentiarybasistosupporttheamountofcoverageorderedhowever,thismaybeinresponse toanappealbythepayorspouse.See,e.g.,Zangariv.Cunningham,839So.2d918,919(Fla. Ct.App.2003)(citingcasesreferencingarequirementthattheamountoflifeinsurance coveragerequiredbearsomecorrelationtotheprojectedalimonyamounts).Otherrecentout ofstateauthorityholdstheamountoflifeinsuranceorderedtosecureanalimonyobligationis discretionarywiththecourt.Seee.g.,Braunv.Braun,907N.E.2d681(Mass.App.Ct.2009) (whereinafternotinganorderrequiringthepayorspousetomaintainlifeinsurancewas discretionary,thecourtfurtherheld:"Itfollowsthattheamountofsuchinsurancealsorestsin thediscretionofthejudge.") Here,wefindthefamilycourtwaswithinitsdiscretiontoreducetheamountoflifeinsurance Husbandwasrequiredtomaintain. 8.WifearguesthefamilycourtshouldhavegrantedhermotiontodisqualifyattorneyRebecca WestfromrepresentingHusbandinthismatter.Wedisagree. ThecommentstotheSouthCarolinaRulesofProfessionalConductprovide:"Aftertermination

ofaclientlawyerrelationship,alawyerhascertaincontinuingdutieswithrespectto confidentiality...andthusmaynotrepresentanotherclientexceptinconformitywith[the Rules.]"Rule407,SCACR,Rule1.9n.1(2009). Inthiscase,thefamilycourtdeterminedWestobtainednoconfidentialinformationthroughher representationofWife,andbecauseWifecommunicatedno"substantialinformation"and becausesuchinformationwascommunicatedthroughthirdpartiesorinvolvedinteractions betweenWifeandthirdparties,suchinformationwasnotentitledtoattorneyclientprivilege.[2] NotwithstandingthatWifefailstosubstantiatewhatlegalremedy,ifany,isaffordedherbythe RulesofProfessionalConductonappealwefindtherecordsupportsthefamilycourt'sfinding thatWestgainednoconfidentialor"substantialinformation"duringthecourseofherlimited representationofWife.Furthermore,wefinditcompellingtonote,asdidthefamilycourt,that theinformationcreatingtheallegedconflictcouldhavebeenobtainedfromothersources,such astheWife'saffidavitandtheTemporaryOrder,allofwhichwerefiledbeforeWestwasa namedcounselforHusband.ForthesereasonsWifehasfailedtodemonstrateanyprejudice, andwethereforeaffirmtherulingofthefamilycourt.SeeDavisv.Davis,372S.C.64,86,641 S.E.2d446,458(Ct.App.2006)(statingthatthiscourtwillnotreversethefamilycourtunless theerrorismaterialandprejudicialtothesubstantialrightsoftheappellant). CONCLUSION Fortheaforementionedreasons,therulingofthetrialcourtis AFFIRMED. HUFF,THOMAS,andPIEPER,JJ.,conc .

[1]WifealsofiledanunsuccessfulpetitionforawritofsupersedeaswiththisCourttoreinstate thetemporaryalimonyaward. [2]Werecognizethatthefamilycourtalsofoundthatevenhadtheattorneyclientprivilege arisen,WifeimplicitlywaivedanyobjectionofWest'srepresentationofHusband.Whilewe neednotdecidewhetherWife'saffirmativeactofplacingherearningpotentialinquestion,for thepurposesofalimonycalculation,constitutesawaiverofprivilege,wedofindthatwithout Westpossessinganyconfidentialinformation,therecordinthismatterandthejurisprudenceof thisstatesupportthefamilycourt'sindicationthatWife'sdelayofoveroneyearfromthetime WestbecameHusband'scounsel,overtenmonthsfromthedateofthedepositioninwhichWife protestedWest'spresence,andoverninemonthsafterWife'sattorneyservedWestwiththe NoticeofAppearance,waivedanyobjectiontoWest'srepresentationofHusband.SeeBakala v.Bakala,352S.C.612,623,576S.E.2d156,162(2003)(notingthatwhenapartybecomes awareofexpartecommunicationhemustmakeatimelyobjectionorsuchobjectionshallbe deemedwaived)Swentonv.Swenton,336S.C.472,486,520S.E.2d330,338(Ct.App.1999) (findingthatapartyhaswaivedanobjectiontoarbitrationbyparticipatingwithoutobjection) Pattersonv.Patterson,288S.C.282,28485,341S.E.2d819,820(Ct.App.1986)(recognizing thatapartymayimplicitlywaiveobjectiontoajudge'sfailuretorecusehimselfbyproceeding withtrialwithoutobjectionwhenthefact(s)allegedlymandatingrecusalisknown).