Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter
The House assembled at 10:00 A.M.
Deliberations were opened with prayer by the Chaplain of the House of Representatives, the Rev. Dr. Alton C. Clark as follows:
O God of our lives, without Whose guidance our efforts are weak, we pray that we may see clearly Your leadership and that we will follow it without faltering. May we guard our words with understanding and charity. Spare us from ingratitude and pettiness, from turning coward when the road becomes difficult. We thank You for lessons learned from the past as we have been warned by our mistakes, encouraged by our successes, and enriched by every experience.
And as we now feel the weight of our responsibilities, enable us to hear clearly the words of the Psalmist: "God is our Refuge and Strength, a very present Help" (Psalm 46:1). Amen.
Pursuant to Rule 6.3, the House of Representatives was led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America by the SPEAKER.
After corrections to the Journal of the proceedings of yesterday, the SPEAKER ordered it confirmed.
The following was received.
JOINT LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE FOR JUDICIAL SCREENING
TO: The Clerk of the Senate
The Clerk of the House
FROM: Thomas H. Pope, III, Chairman
Judicial Screening Committee
DATE: May 27, 1991
In compliance with the provisions of Act No. 119, 1975 S.C. Acts 122, it is respectfully requested that the following information be printed in the Journals of the Senate and the House.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/Thomas H. Pope, III, Chairman
/s/Rep. Larry E. Gentry, Vice-Chairman
/s/Senator John A. Martin
/s/Senator Isadore E. Lourie
/s/Senator Glenn F. McConnell
/s/Rep. Daniel E. Martin, Sr.
/s/Rep. B. L. Hendricks, Jr.
/s/Rep. James H. Hodges
Pursuant to Act No. 119, 1975 S.C. Acts 122, this Committee met to consider the qualifications of the candidates seeking election to the position of Judge of the Family Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit (Greenville and Pickens Counties), Seat #3.
The Judicial Screening Committee is charged by law to consider the qualifications of candidates for the Judiciary. When notice is received that an individual intends to seek election or reelection to the Bench, the Committee conducts such investigation of the candidate as it deems appropriate and reports its Findings to the General Assembly prior to the election. It is not the function of the Committee to recommend one candidate over another or to suggest to the individual legislator for whom to vote. Instead, it is the Committee's role to determine whether a candidate is qualified to sit as a Judge. Under the statute, the Committee's determination in regard to each candidate is not binding on the members of the General Assembly.
Having completed the investigation as required by the act, the Committee by this Report respectfully submits its Findings to the members of the General Assembly for their consideration.
The Report consists of the Transcript of the Proceedings before the Screening Committee, held at the State House on May 23, 1991, and the portions of the documents submitted by the candidates which were made part of the public record.
Each candidate's file includes an extensive Personal Data Questionnaire, a Statement of Economic Interests, five letters of reference, including one from the candidate's banker, and the report of a background investigation by SLED. These documents may be viewed in the office of the Judicial Screening Committee in Room 402 of the Gressette Building until the date and time of the election.
The candidates were present at the screening and testified under oath.
SENATOR POPE: THIS SCREENING COMMITTEE IS PURSUANT TO ACT 119 OF 1975 REQUIRING THE REVIEW OF CANDIDATES FOR JUDICIAL OFFICE. THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMITTEE IS NOT TO CHOOSE BETWEEN CANDIDATES, BUT RATHER TO DECLARE WHETHER OR NOT THE CANDIDATES WHO OFFER FOR POSITIONS ON THE BENCH ARE IN OUR JUDGMENT QUALIFIED TO FILL THE POSITIONS. THE INQUIRY WHICH WE UNDERTAKE IS THOROUGH. IT INVOLVES A COMPLETE PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND CHECK ON EVERY CANDIDATE. THE CANDIDATE IS INVESTIGATED BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, INCLUDING COURTROOM RECORDS. A STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST IS REQUIRED. WE RECEIVE A CREDIT REPORT. WE RECEIVE REPORTS FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE WITH RESPECT TO ATTORNEYS AND JUDGES WHO ARE OFFERING, AND FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON JUDICIAL STANDARDS WITH RESPECT TO SITTING JUDGES. THE CANDIDATE'S PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE DETAILS THE PERSONAL HISTORY, HEALTH AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND CONTAINS FIVE LETTERS OF REFERENCE. WE ARE PLANNING TO MOVE EXPEDITIOUSLY BUT THOROUGHLY TODAY, AND WE APOLOGIZE FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE THAT WE HAVE CAUSED THE CANDIDATES OR WILL CAUSE THEM BECAUSE THE SENATE GOES IN SESSION IN A SHORT WHILE AND WE WILL MEET AS LONG AS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE OUR WORK TODAY. THE CANDIDATES, OF COURSE, HERE TODAY ARE HERE FOR THE FAMILY COURT JUDGESHIP IN GREENVILLE. WE DON'T HAVE A DATE OF THE VACANCY AND WE DON'T HAVE THE DATE OF ELECTION DUE TO THE LATE HOUR. WE HAVE A LETTER FROM JUDGE SMITH IN MARCH WHERE HE INDICATED A PLAN TO RETIRE ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1991. THAT IS NOT CONFIRMED AS AN ABSOLUTE DATE. I WOULD REMIND EVERYONE HERE THAT THERE IS A POLICY WHICH THIS COMMITTEE HAS BEEN FOLLOWING SINCE LAST YEAR OF REMINDING THE CANDIDATES AND THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT COMMITMENTS OR PLEDGES WILL NOT BE MADE UNTIL AFTER SCREENING IS CONCLUDED, AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CANDIDATES, WE EXPECT AND HOPE THAT SCREENING WILL BE CONCLUDED WHEN THE REPORT IS SIGNED, WHICH WE EXPECT WOULD BE NEXT WEEK. THERE IS NO REASON IN THE WORLD, I DON'T BELIEVE, WHY WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE REPORT COMPLETED BY EARLY OR AT LEAST MID-WEEK, AT WHICH POINT WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT YOU WOULD BE FREE TO SEEK ANY COMMITMENTS AND PLEDGES YOU MAY WISH. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF BRIEF MATTERS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE UP IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. I APOLOGIZE TO ALL OF YOU CANDIDATES THAT ARE HERE, BUT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK YOU FOR A BRIEF FEW MOMENTS TO LEAVE THE ROOM.
SENATOR POPE: BEFORE WE PROCEED, SINCE ALL THE CANDIDATES ARE HERE, AND AS YOU ALL ARE SCREENED, YOU ARE PERFECTLY FREE TO LEAVE WHEN WE CONCLUDE OUR QUESTIONS. I WOULD TELL ALL OF YOU THIS, TO AVOID ANY CONFUSION THE REPORT WE EXPECT WILL BE SIGNED--IT'S OFFICIAL BY PLEDGING AS SOON AS THE LAST COMMITTEE MEMBER SIGNS IT. WE EXPECT THAT WILL BE PERHAPS TUESDAY, AND CERTAINLY BY WEDNESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. THE PROCEDURE HAS BEEN THAT MS. SATTERWHITE AS SOON AS THE LAST COMMITTEE MEMBER SIGNS IT, SHE WILL CALL EVERY CANDIDATE AT ANY NUMBER YOU WANT TO LEAVE. SHE HAS YOUR NUMBERS I THINK, YOUR OFFICE NUMBERS. SHE CALLS ALL CANDIDATES TO TELL THEM THAT IT'S OFFICIAL, AND SO IF YOU WANT TO CALL HER, SAY, TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY, THAT IS PERFECTLY ALL RIGHT ALSO. SHE ALSO WILL MAIL YOU THE REPORT THE DAY IT'S SIGNED. SO THAT IS SORT OF THE WAY NOTIFICATION IS, BUT FEEL FREE TO CALL HER IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU ARE OUT OF POCKET OR NOT NEAR YOUR PHONE NUMBER. CONSISTENT WITH OUR PROCEDURE, WE WILL START ALPHABETICALLY. MR. BARTLETT WILL BE FIRST. STEPHEN S. BARTLETT, FIRST BEING DULY SWORN, TESTIFIES AS FOLLOWS:
Q MR. BARTLETT, YOU WERE SCREENED LESS THAN TWO MONTHS AGO I BELIEVE?
A YES, SIR.
Q WE WILL PROCEED. THE PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY THAT YOU HAVE IS THE SAME ONE SUBMITTED IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR PREVIOUS SCREENING?
A YES.
Q YOU DON'T HAVE ANY CHANGES TO MAKE TO IT?
A NO, SIR.
Q YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO US MAKING IT A PART OF THE RECORD?
A NO, SIR.
1. Stephen S. Bartlett
Home Address: Business Address:
111 Teal Lane P. O. Box 488
Mauldin, SC 29662 Greenville, SC 29662
2. He was born in San Diego, California on April 23, 1952. He is presently 38 years old.
Social Security Number: ***-**-*****
4. He was married to Elizabeth Anthony on January 12, 1980. He has one child, S. Wyman Bartlett, age 10, and one step-child, Craig A. Colaluca, age 18.
5. Military Service: None
6. He attended Montgomery Community College, 1971, transferred; Central Missouri State University, 1972-1974, B.S. Degree; and the University of South Carolina School of Law, 1974-1977, J.D. Degree.
7. At Central Missouri State, he was on the varsity debate team and was captain of the varsity pistol team. At the University of South Carolina, he was Justice of the Supreme Court. At the University of South Carolina Law Center, Criminal Justice Institute, he was a clerk for Professor Jon Thames.
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
Every year he has reported excess hours of JCLE from the following: National Judicial College, National Institute for Court Management and South Carolina Bar.
9. Courses taught or lectures given:
National Judicial College, 1986 to present
South Carolina Bar, CLE Seminar
Criminal Justice Academy, JCLE Seminar
Greenville Tech, part-time faculty members, law courses
12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
Assistant City Attorney, Greenville, S. C.
General government law and criminal prosecution - 1977
Assistant Circuit Solicitor, Greenville County
Prosecutor in circuit and magistrates court for first two years; represented solicitors office in Family Court for last year, 1977 to 1980
Municipal Court Judge, City of Greenville, S. C.
Full-time judge of Municipal Court with staff of 17 - 1980 to present
14. Frequency of appearance in court:
Federal -
State -
Other - 100% in Municipal Court as Judge
15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil -
Criminal - 100% (as Judge)
Domestic -
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 25%
Non-jury - 75%
20. Judicial Office: Municipal Judge for the City of Greenville, South Carolina, appointed by Mayor and Council, Municipal Court has limited criminal jurisdiction
21. Due to the nature of Municipal Court, few written orders or opinions are rendered. Municipal Court is not a court of record. The one opinion he has written that was reviewed on appeal concerned the necessity defense. It was upheld by the Supreme Court.
27. He has no potential conflicts of interest apparent in any financial arrangements or business relationships.
30. Tax Lien: There was a federal tax lien in 1984. The family business was being sold, and they were unable to pay the taxes in the last quarter. It was paid within months.
31. Sued: He has been named in a few suits where he was acting as Judge. All cases were dismissed.
33. His last physical was in May of 1990 by Dr. Jim Burford, 3850 E. North Street, Greenville, South Carolina.
35. He wears corrective lenses.
39. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar and the American Bar Association
40. Civic, charitable, religious, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
He is on the Board of Directors for the Family Counseling Center of Greenville, 1982-1988. It is a United Way agency that was responsible for family counseling, counseling of abused spouses, battered wives' shelter, and travelers' aid.
42. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) W. H. "Bard" Parks, President and CEO
BB&T Company of South Carolina
P. O. Box 6807, Greenville, SC 29606-6807
(b) William L. Dodson, Jr., Esquire
P. O. Box 2547, Greenville, SC 29602
(c) Ernest J. Howard, Esquire
P. O. Box 10383, Greenville, SC 29603-0383
(d) B. O. Thomason, Jr., Esquire
P. O. Box 10045, Greenville, SC 29603
(e) Weyman H. Dodson, Jr., Esquire
P. O. Box 2566, Greenville, SC 29602
Q CONSISTENT WITH YOUR LAST SCREENING, THE REPORTS WE RECEIVED FROM THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE AND THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION WERE NEGATIVE, AS WERE ALL THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CHECKS WE MADE AT THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT AND GREENVILLE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENTS OF MAULDIN AND GREENVILLE, AS WELL AS SLED AND F.B.I. NOTHING HAS TRANSPIRED SINCE YOUR LAST SCREENING THAT WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO UPDATE ANY OF THIS INFORMATION?
A NO, SIR.
Q YOUR HEALTH IS STILL GOOD?
A YES, SIR.
Q NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP OR ISSUED ANY COMPLAINTS OR DESIRED TO BE PRESENT TODAY, AND WE HAVE ASKED YOU THE QUESTIONS WE NORMALLY ASK ABOUT JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD AT THIS TIME, MR. BARTLETT?
A NO, SIR.
Q I THINK SINCE YOU WERE SCREENED SO RECENTLY WE DON'T NEED TO BELABOR THIS. WOULD THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS LIKE TO ASK MR. BARTLETT ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
REPRESENTATIVE GENTRY: NO, SIR.
SENATOR POPE: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT IS ERNEST HAMILTON. ERNEST HAMILTON, FIRST BEING DULY SWORN, TESTIFIES AS FOLLOWS:
Q MR. HAMILTON, YOU WERE SCREENED FAIRLY RECENTLY ALSO; I BELIEVE LAST OCTOBER?
A MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT WAS WHEN I WAS IN THAT CIRCUIT RACE. I KNOW MY WORK HISTORY SHOWS THAT I AM A HARD WORKER. I WINKED AT TRYING TO GET AN EASIER JOB. I WON'T MAKE THAT MISTAKE AGAIN.
Q YOU HAVE REVIEWED THE PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY?
Q I HAVE.
Q DOES IT NEED ANY AMENDMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS?
A NO, AMENDMENTS.
Q YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO US MAKING IT PART OF THE RECORD IN THIS CASE?
A NO OBJECTION.
1. Ernest Hamilton
Home Address: Business Address:
208 Dove Tree Road Suite 113, Courthouse Annex
Greenville, SC 29615 Greenville, SC 29601-2192
2. He was born in Greenville, South Carolina on April 24, 1951. He is presently 40 years old.
Social Security Number: ***-**-*****
4. He was married to Lois Andreia Weir on June 11, l977. He has two children: Ryan Ernest, age 11, and Lindsay Brooke, age 7.
5. Military service: None
6. He attended Michigan State University, 1969-1973, B.S., and the University of South Carolina Law School, 1981-1983, J.D.
7. At Michigan State he played varsity football and was on the Honor Council at the University of South Carolina Law School.
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
Northwestern University School of Law, short course for Prosecuting Attorneys; National College of District Attorneys; Attorney General's Leadership Convention; Solicitor's Association of South Carolina Convention
12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
Assistant Solicitor, 13th Judicial Circuit, 1984-present.
14. Frequency of appearances in court:
State - 100%
15. Percentage of litigation:
Criminal: 100%
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury: 30%
Non-Jury: 70%
Sole counsel.
17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) State vs. Stanley E. Woods, 84-GS-23-3956, Armed Robbery; 84-GS-23-3955, Kidnapping; 84-GS-23-3954, Rape. A 17-year-old store clerk was the victim. Police initially rejected her story of a perpetrator being a black male with a wig and make up. No one was charged. In her statement she mentioned the defendant took her pocket knife. He read through inventory sheets of property found in defendant's car from another case and found a knife which victim identified as hers. He worked this case up for Court and was associate counsel in trial with Judge Traxler (then Solicitor).
(b) State vs. Robert Lagore, 90-GS-23-3427, Felony DUI X 3; 90-GS-23-3428; 90-GS-23-3426. Serious bodily injury. The issue was whether the Defendant was impaired at .09 and the admissibility of a blood test not taken at the direction of the arresting officer in accordance to statute.
(c) State vs. John David Coleman, 86-GS-23-2361, DUI. Jury returned guilty verdict in six minutes, the shortest deliberation returned in Greenville County General Sessions Court.
(d) State vs. Robert W. Davis, 90-GS-23-4332, Felony DUI-Death. This was a New Year's morning collision with both drivers with a .20BA. The passenger killed had a.25BA. The issue was whether both automobiles were on the wrong side of the road (cross center line) and whether the Defendant was under 17 when the incident happened at 2:00 a.m. on his birthday. The Defendant's birth records show that he was born at 3:45 p.m.
(e) State vs. Thomas Lynn Porter, 85-GS-23-0899, Setting Up Lotteries. The Defendant was the biggest gambler in the Southeast and had eluded law officers in the past. Defense was that he was at the location to use the phone. The evidence admitted showed personal interest.
24. Any Occupation, Business or Profession Other Than the Practice of Law: He was a probation agent, State of South Carolina, 1975, and a Criminal Investigator for the Thirteenth Circuit Solicitor's Office, 1975-1981.
33. His health is good.
39. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association; American Judicature Society; Greenville Bar Association; Association of Trial Lawyers of America (inactive); and American Bar Association (inactive)
40. Civic, charitable, religious, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
Piedmont Council for Prevention of Child Abuse, board member; Alumni Chapter of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, parliamentarian; and Greenville Cultural Exchange Center, board member
41. He has had a few appearances in Family Court, and he understands the need for judges to have a good grasp of the law; willingness to think through problems and be extremely fair. His work in General Sessions is an indication of the diligence he could put forth in Family Court with the best interest of children kept in mind when they are to be affected by the court's action.
42. Five letters of recommendation:
(a) Chester Leaks, Assistant Vice President
NCNB
P. O. Box 608, Greenville, SC 29602
(b) B. O. Thomason, Jr., Esquire
P. O. Box 10045, Greenville, SC 29603
(c) James R. Burkhard, Associate Professor of Law
University of South Carolina School of Law
Columbia, SC 29208
(d) Rex L. Carter, Esquire
P. O. Box 10828, Greenville, SC 29603
(e) John E. Montgomery, Dean
University of South Carolina School of Law
Columbia, SC 29208
Q IT WILL BE DONE. THE RECORDS OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES HAS BEEN CHECKED AND REPORTED THAT NO COMPLAINTS OR CHARGES HAVE EVER BEEN FILED AGAINST YOU. THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RECORDS ARE NEGATIVE. THE RECORDS OF THE APPLICABLE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, GREENVILLE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT ARE NEGATIVE, AS ARE SLED AND F.B.I., AND THE JUDGMENT ROLLS OF GREENVILLE COUNTY ARE NEGATIVE. YOUR HEALTH IS GOOD. THE STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST YOU SUPPLIED US SHOWS NO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. THE COMMITTEE IS SATISFIED WITH THE NET WORTH STATEMENT AND CREDIT REPORTS YOU HAVE SUBMITTED. NO COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND NO WITNESSES HAVE ASKED TO TESTIFY. MR. HAMILTON, WHAT DO YOU FEEL IS THE APPROPRIATE DEMEANOR FOR A JUDGE IN FAMILY COURT?
A THE APPROPRIATE DEMEANOR IS TO BE FAIR TO EVERYONE INVOLVED, THE ATTORNEYS AND THE PARTIES; TO HAVE A GOOD GRASP OF THE LAW AND THE ABILITY TO WORK HARD AT THE JOB.
Q WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO AVOID THE SYNDROME CALLED "ROBEITIS" THAT SOMETIMES AFFECTS A VERY FEW JUDGES?
A WHAT I WOULD DO TO AVOID THAT IS TO KEEP IN MIND THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF MY DUTIES AS A JUDGE, AND THAT IS TO BE FAIR, BE FAIR AT ALL TIMES, AND TO CONCENTRATE MOSTLY, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE WHERE CHILDREN ARE INVOLVED, TO CONCENTRATE ON TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR WELFARE WOULD BENEFIT BY THE COURSE OF THE COURT'S ACTION.
Q WHAT PORTION OF YOUR PRACTICE IS NOW FAMILY COURT?
A MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE HAD ONLY A FEW APPEARANCES IN FAMILY COURT AS AN ATTORNEY IN ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS, A NAME CHANGE, AND AS PART OF MY DUTY AS ASSISTANT SOLICITOR, I WAS ASSIGNED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES CASES IN THE FAMILY COURT FOR A PERIOD, BUT THE BULK OF MY EXPERIENCE AS AN ATTORNEY HAS BEEN IN GENERAL SESSIONS COURT. THAT BACKGROUND HAS HELPED ME MAINTAIN MY ANALYTICAL ABILITY TO INTERPRET THE LAW AND APPLY LAWS TO DIFFERENT FACT SITUATIONS, BEING THAT THE FACT SITUATIONS COME UP DIFFERENTLY IN EVERY CASE. THE LAW CHANGES SOMEWHAT, BUT MY EXPERIENCE AS AN ATTORNEY IN THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE HAS KEPT THOSE SKILLS INTACT.
Q AS FAR AS THE NEED--FAMILY COURT JUDGES FREQUENTLY HAVE TO BE AVAILABLE AT ODD HOURS AND LATE HOURS AND FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AND SOMETIMES EVEN WEEKENDS, DOES THAT PRESENT ANY PROBLEMS FOR YOU AS FAR AS YOUR PERSONAL SCHEDULE?
A NO. IN FACT, I'M IN THAT POSITION NOW AS AN ASSISTANT SOLICITOR TO BE AVAILABLE AT DIFFERENT HOURS.
SENATOR POPE: DOES THE COMMITTEE HAVE QUESTIONS OF MR. HAMILTON?
Q I WANT TO FOLLOW UP, GOING BACK TO THE "ROBEITIS" QUESTION, WHAT I'M INTERESTED IN FROM CANDIDATES IN ADDRESSING THAT IS THE QUESTION OF BEING ABLE TO DEAL WITH STRESS AND SHORT-TEMPEREDNESS BY JUDGES ON THE BENCH, WHICH WHEN THEY GET ON LAWYERS AND LITIGANTS, IN MY JUDGMENT, CAN END UP CAUSING PEOPLE NOT TO BE ABLE TO DO THEIR JOB, AND I GUESS MY QUESTION IS HOW WOULD YOU HANDLE THE QUESTION OF STRESS AND SHORT TEMPEREDNESS, IS THAT A PROBLEM WITH YOU?
A THAT IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH ME. I HAVE AN ATHLETIC BACKGROUND IN THAT I HAVE PARTICIPATED IN ATHLETICS AND COME UPON PERIODS THAT WERE STRESSFUL. IN FACT, THAT BACKGROUND HAS CARRIED OVER, BUT AS AN ASSISTANT SOLICITOR I HAVE A CASELOAD OF 700 CASES TO PROSECUTE AND I'M DEALING WITH ATTORNEYS AND DEFENDANTS ALL THE TIME, AND MY BOSS, COURT ADMINISTRATION, HAS ENCOURAGED US TO MOVE THE CASES, SO YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE IN STRESSFUL SITUATIONS WITH ALL TYPES OF TIME CONSTRAINTS AND PRESSURE, SO I HAVE BEEN IN THAT AREA, AND FROM MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE COMMUNITY, THEY HAVE NOT FOUND ME TO BE A PERSON THAT IS HARD TO DEAL WITH IN THOSE TYPES OF SITUATIONS.
SENATOR POPE: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE?
Q IF YOU WERE TO BECOME FAMILY COURT JUDGE, PUT THE TRADITIONAL BLACK ROBE ON, WOULD YOU HAVE ANY REASON TO FEEL YOU WERE SUPERIOR TO ANYONE ELSE?
A I HAVE NEVER--IN FACT, I HAVE CONSTANTLY TRIED TO IMPROVE MYSELF, BUT, NO, SUPERIOR. NO ONE ON THIS EARTH IS SUPERIOR.
SENATOR POPE: THANK YOU MR. HAMILTON. NEXT MR. ROBERT NATHANIEL JENKINS. ROBERT N. JENKINS, SR., FIRST BEING DULY SWORN, TESTIFIES AS FOLLOWS:
Q MR. JENKINS, YOU HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW YOUR PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY?
A YES, SIR, I DID.
Q IS IT CORRECT?
A IT IS CORRECT.
Q IT DOES NOT NEED ANY MODIFICATION?
A NO, SIR, IT DOES NOT.
Q YOU WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO US MAKING IT PART OF THE RECORD?
A NO OBJECTION.
1. Robert Nathaniel Jenkins, Sr.
Home Address: Business Address:
10 Zelma Drive c/o Legal Services
Greenville, SC 29609 P. O. Box 10706, F.S.
Greenville, SC 29603
2. He was born in McClellanville, South Carolina, on August 8, 1947. He is presently 43 years old.
Social Security Number: ***-**-*****
4. He was married to Margaret H. Rivers on August 6, 1972. He has two children: Robert Nathaniel, Jr., age 18 (high school senior), and Jason Matthew, age 11 (fourth grade).
5. Military Service: 8/66 through 5/69, Regular Air Force, E-5, Staff Sergeant, AF11820038, ***-**-*****; 6/69 through 8/72, Inactive Reserve, Air Force, Honorably Discharged, 8/72
6. He attended Yuba Community College (1967/1968), Marysville, California, evening college while on military active duty; Sacramento State College (1968), Beale AFB, California, extension college, evening classes while on military active duty; University of Guam (1968/1969), Agana, Guam, evening college while on active duty; The Citadel (1969-1972), Military College of South Carolina, B.A. Degree, Political Science; the University of South Carolina Law School (1972-1975), Juris Doctorate.
7. Significant Activities During Schooling:
1970-1972 One of the original organizers of The Citadel Big Brothers Association for orphans at Jenkins Orphanage, Charleston, South Carolina
1970-1972 One of the original organizers of The Citadel's Black Students Association; served as the First Secretary/Treasurer
1970-1972 Under the sponsorship of The Citadel's Black Students Association, coordinated an evening tutoring program for minority elementary students on the Eastside of Downtown Charleston (Presbyterian Center)
1970-1972 Member of The Citadel's Veteran Association
1972-1975 Member of The Black Law Students Association; elected President, 1975
Served as a tutor for minority first year law students
1972-1975 Member of the Student Division, American Bar Association; served as a student delegate from The University of South Carolina Law School
1972-1975 Served as a graduate student internist with the Office of The Governor (Division of Administration)
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
He has consistently satisfied CLE requirements in excess of the minimum 12 hours in the following areas:
Appellate Practice (State/Federal) - bar sponsored
Family Law Practice - bar sponsored
Evidence - bar sponsored
Economics of Law Practice - bar sponsored; including ABA
Government Law - bar sponsored
Poverty Law Practice through the South Carolina Legal Services Association
9. Courses taught or lectures given:
He has taught the Juvenile Law/Pre-Trial Diversion Course through the sponsorship of the Department of Youth Services and the Local Solicitors' Office. It is a ten (10) weeks course designed to teach juveniles between ages 13-16 responsible civil conduct under the law, giving them exposures through site visits and guest presenters of law enforcement functions (1986-1988).
12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
1976-1979 Engaged in the active practice of law as a Staff Attorney/Mgr. Attorney with the Legal Services Agency headquartered in Charleston, South Carolina (NLAP, Inc.). Provided direct legal assistance to indigent clients in the areas of Family Law (50%), State/Federal Housing Law (20%), State/Federal Public Benefit Laws (15%) and State/Federal Consumer Law involved in Claim & Delivery and Deficiency Suits (10%). Other areas of services provided included the preparation of wills and deeds; power of attorneys for clients financial affairs. Yearly caseload exceeded 300 cases. In this position, he coordinated expansion offices in Georgetown, Kingstree and Beaufort Counties. He also coordinated the attorney's office schedule for client intake and served as the office managing attorney for liaison with the local courts. Office yearly caseload exceeded 5,000 cases.
1979-1991 Engaged in the active practice of law as an Attorney/Administration titled: Director/General Counsel for Legal Services Agency of Western Carolina, Inc. in Greenville, South Carolina. Fifty percent of time is devoted to client practice in association with 13 staff attorneys in the areas of: State Family Law Practice (50%), State/Federal Housing Law (20%), State/Federal Public Benefit Law (15%), State/Federal Consumer Law (10%) and other legal assistance services associated with the practice of Poverty Law. He is responsible for the legal services provided from offices located in Greenville, Anderson and Greenwood serving those areas and the adjoining counties of Edgefield, McCormick, Abbeville, Oconee and Pickens. Yearly total caseload exceeds 4,000 cases.
He is responsible for the hiring and training of all staff attorneys. He is responsible for relations with the court system and the community. He serves as liaison to the local bar associations.
He is responsible for a yearly operating budget of one million dollars and serves as the general counsel for the corporations' financial affairs with state/federal government and regulating bodies.
He reports to a fifteen-member board of directors who serves in a quasi-public role.
14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - infrequent appearances by written motions in Social Security cases
State - selective appearances in staff cases requiring his involvement
Other - Administrative Law - routine appearances before Social Security Bureau of Hearings and Appeals and State Administrative Bodies
15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 50%
Criminal - 0%
Domestic - 50%
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 0-5%
Non-jury - 95%
50% - Associated with staff
50% - Sole or chief
17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Creel v. Miles, In Re Dianne Mary Miles, Supreme Court unpublished memorandum #79-179, September, 1979. This case involved an unsuccessful attempt to get practical compliance with the ten-day hearing rule in cases where a minor has been taken into protective custody through DSS and law enforcement to protect rights of the parent.
(b) Fieldcrest Tenants Association, et al. v. Housing Authority of Greenville, U. S. District Court, Greenville - 1980. This case involved the prosecution of Due Process rights of public housing tenants against irregular conduct and practices of public housing management in setting improper rent, improper assessments for maintenance repairs and causing wide spread evictions for improper reasons. Prosecuted as a class action, the matter was successfully resolved by court consent in favor of all families living in Greenville Public Housing. It resulted in better management practices which gave proper respect for the leasehold rights of public tenants.
(c) John Plumley, et al. v. School District of Greenville and State Board of Education, U.S. 4th Cir. (Unpublished 1982, #81-1894). This case was important because of right to attorney's fees by staff lawyers were permitted at reasonable levels where prosecution is successful under Section 1983 of the federal civil statute.
(d) Greenville Housing Authority v. Jessie Salters, 316 SE2d 718 (S.C. 1984). This case is important because it involved preventing a 64-year-old lady who lived in public housing all her life from being made homeless by ejectment actions of the housing authority based on circumstances beyond her control.
(e) Greenville Housing Authority v. Lena Massey, 316 SE2d 722 (S.C. 1984). This case is important because it tests the limit to which Circuit Court Rule on Depositions may be used for actions in Magistrate Court, when concurrent jurisdiction exists in matters such as ejectments.
18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Creel v. Miles, In Re Dianne Mary Miles, Supreme Court, Unpublished Memorandum #79-179, September 24, 1979
22. Public Office:
Appointed as Director, Legal Services Agency of Western Carolina, Inc. through local quasi-public policy board under regulations of the National/Federal Legal Services Corporation - 1979 through present
Appointee for The Governor, State Committee on Workers Compensation Laws (1984-1986)
Appointee for the State Policy Board of The South Carolina Protection of the Handicaps Agency - presently (appointed November, 1990)
Appointee for The State Secretary of Education to The Citadel Board of Visitors - presently (appointed March, 1991)
24. Any Occupation, Business or Profession Other Than the Practice of Law:
State Government Employee (1972-1976), Office of The Governor, Division of Administration (Supplemental Graduate Student Employee)
Sam Solomon Wholesaler (part-time undergraduate work/stockroom (1971 - 6 months)
Pic & Pay Shoe Retailer (Management Trainee Program (1972 - 4 months)
Military Service (Air Force - 1966-1969)
Chock Full O Nuts Restaurant Chain (Clerk - 1964-1966)
25. Officer or Director: Director over the general management of an eight county, three office, quasi-public, not-for-profit Legal Services Agency of Western Carolina, Inc. He is responsible for the daily supervision of thirteen (13) staff lawyers, four (4) paralegals, five (5) paralegal interns and ten (10) support staffs. Term: 1979-present, serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the board.
33. His health is excellent. His last physical was in 1988 by Dr. James Burford, Eastside Family Practice, 3850 E. North Street, Greenville, SC 29615, 292-0680.
35. He wears eyeglasses to correct his vision.
39. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association, member, served on the Services to Indigent Committee from its inception to present, member of the Economics of Law Practice Division; South Carolina Black Lawyers Association, member, served as its Treasurer, 1976-1980; Greenville Bar Association, dues paying member; American Bar Association, member, served on the Economics of Law Practice Group; South Carolina Legal Services Advisory Group, serves as Chairman, 1983-present; National Project Advisory Group for Legal Services, serves as South Carolina representatives
40. Civic, charitable, religious, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
Brockwood Apartments for Senior Citizens, Board Secretary; Greenville's Child, Incorporated, Board Member; Senior Action Advisory Board, Board Member; Senior Action Advisory Board, Board Member; Sunbelt Human Advancement, Inc. (S.H.A.R.E.), Board Member; Allen Temple A.M.E. Church, Board of Trustees, Assistant Superintendent of Sunday Schools, Member of Finance Commission; Greenville Chamber of Commerce, Board Member (1989); Duncan Chapel School, Volunteer Teacher; Travelers Rest High School, P.T.A. Ways & Means Committee; Association of Citadel Men, Member
41. Other Information: Concurrent Resolution S.698 from the State Legislature for Outstanding Service as a Governor Appointee to the State Committee for Improvement of Workers Compensation Laws, 1987; Certificate of Appreciation Award from the State Department of Youth Services for teaching the Pre-Trial Diversion Class for Juveniles, 1985; Columbia University School of Law, completed two weeks course in Civil Procedure taught by Judge J. Weinstein; Leadership South Carolina, 1983 graduate; Leadership Greenville, 1982 graduate; Leadership Course (one week), Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, North Carolina, 1989
42. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) C. C. Hutto, Jr., Senior Vice President and
Regional Executive Community Banking
South Carolina National Bank
P. O. Box 969, Greenville, SC 29602
(b) John P. Britton, Esquire
P. O. Box 10589, Greenville, SC 29603
(c) William M. Catoe, Jr., Esquire
P. O. Box 10262 F.S., Greenville, SC 29603
(d) Honorable Theo W. Mitchell
P. O. Box 142, Columbia, SC 29202
(e) Thomas L. Stephenson, Esquire
P. O. Box 87, Greenville, SC 29602-0087
Q WE WILL DO THAT. THE STAFF HAS CHECKED WITH THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE AND THEY REPORT NO COMPLAINTS OR CHARGES OF ANY KIND HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST YOU, AND THE RECORDS OF THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT, THE GREENVILLE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT THERE ARE NEGATIVE, AS ARE SLED AND THE F.B.I. THE JUDGMENT ROLLS OF GREENVILLE COUNTY ARE NEGATIVE. THE FEDERAL COURT RECORDS SHOW NO JUDGMENTS AGAINST YOU. WE HAVE NOTED THAT YOU WERE NAMED AS A DEFENDANT IN A CIVIL SUIT WHICH WAS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE IN 1980. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT?
A I AM FAMILIAR WITH THAT.
Q WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT?
A THAT WAS ABOUT A CASE BROUGHT BY A DISCHARGED EMPLOYEE AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. THAT PERSON WAS WORKING AS A PARALEGAL AND THAT PERSON WAS DISCHARGED FOR INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT, PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.
Q I THINK THE GOVERNOR WAS NAMED AS A DEFENDANT ALSO?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q THAT WAS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW YOUR HEALTH IS EXCELLENT?
A EXCELLENT.
Q YOUR STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST SHOWS NO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE FINANCIAL NET WORTH STATEMENT YOU SUBMITTED AND CREDIT REPORTS ARE SATISFACTORY. WE HAVE RECEIVED NO COMPLAINTS AND NOBODY HAS DESIRED TO APPEAR TODAY AGAINST YOU IN ANY WAY, MR. JENKINS. CONCERNING THE QUESTIONS RELATED TO JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT, WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO AVOID THE "ROBEITIS" SYNDROME OF MAYBE A SHORT FUSE ON THE BENCH OR DISCOURTESY TO LITIGANTS OR LAWYERS? WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO MAKE SURE YOU AVOIDED THAT?
A ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT THAT IS A POSITION FOR PUBLIC SERVICE. I VIEW THAT AS A POSITION WHERE I AM SERVING THE PUBLIC, AND AS SUCH, THEN I'M THE SERVANT, AND I WOULD CERTAINLY BE MINDFUL OF COURTESY TO LAWYERS AND THEIR CLIENTS AS THEY COME TO THE BENCH.
Q DOES YOUR PERSONAL SCHEDULE, WOULD IT IN ANY WAY PROHIBIT YOU FROM WORKING WEEKENDS IF NECESSARY OR ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS IN FAMILY COURT MATTERS?
A NO, SIR, IT DOES NOT.
Q WHAT PERCENT OF YOUR PRACTICE NOW IS IN THE FAMILY COURT?
A YOU WILL NOTE THAT I AM OVER A LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM, AND AS SUCH, WE HANDLE A HIGH VOLUME OF MATTERS THAT APPEARS IN FAMILY COURT. AT LEAST 5O PERCENT OF THE CASES THAT WE HANDLED ARE IN FAMILY COURT, AND IN ANY YEAR WE DISPOSE OF IN EXCESS OF 3000 CASES, HALF OF WHICH WOULD BE FAMILY COURT RELATED CASES.
SENATOR POPE: DOES THE COMMITTEE HAVE QUESTIONS.
SENATOR LOURIE: I HAVE NONE.
REPRESENTATIVE GENTRY: I HAVE NONE.
SENATOR POPE: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE NEXT APPLICANT IS ANDREW M. JONES, JR. ANDREW M. JONES, JR., FIRST BEING DULY SWORN, TESTIFIES AS FOLLOWS:
Q MR. JONES, HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY?
A YES, SIR, I HAVE.
Q DOES IT NEED ANY CORRECTIONS?
A NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, SIR. I BELIEVE IT TO BE CORRECT.
Q YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO US MAKING IT PART OF THE RECORD?
A NO, SIR.
1. Andrew M. Jones, Jr.
Home Address: Business Address:
113 Cashmere Drive P. O. Box 10706, F.S.
Greenville, SC 29605 Greenville, SC 29603
2. He was born in Union, South Carolina, on October 8, 1950. He is presently 40 years old.
Social Security Number: ***-**-*****
4. He was married to Eunice Blackmon on December 29, 1976. He has one child:
Andrew M., III, age 13.
5. Military Service: He is a member of the U. S. Naval Reserve with the present rank of Lieutenant assigned to Commander in Chief United States Naval Forces Europe; Reserve Intelligence Unit 0167; Local Support Activity Naval Air Station Atlanta, Marietta, Georgia; Serial No. ***-**-*****.
6. He attended the University of South Carolina-Union Campus, 6/69 - 6/71, AA Degree; the University of South Carolina-Columbia, 8/71 - 12/72, B.A., International Studies; and the University of South Carolina Law School, 8/73 - 5/76, J.D.
7. He was a Delegate to regional Student American Bar Association Conference, 1975-1976 Law school year.
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
He has participated in continuing legal education often obtaining more hours than is required. He obtained 34 hours of CLE in 1990 and carried over 12 hours. He has participated in 17 hours of CLE for this year.
9. Courses taught or lectures given:
He was part-time instructor in Criminal Procedure and Business Law at Greenville Technical College, Greenville, South Carolina, between the dates of June 1978 - June 1982.
12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
From January 1983 - Present
He has worked for Legal Services of Western Carolina providing civil legal service for the indigent.
From February 1981 - January 1983
He engaged in the general practice of law as a sole practitioner.
From January 1979 - February 1981
He was employed by The Honorable Theo Mitchell, engaged in the general practice of law.
From August 1976 - December 1978
He was employed by Mitchell & Joe in the general practice of law.
14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - including Bankruptcy Court 8 times per year
State - 25 times per year
Other - Administrative hearing 3 times per year
15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 60%
Criminal -
Domestic - 40%
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 20%
Non-jury - 80%
Sole Counsel
17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Johnson v. Collins, et al., 89-CP-23-2378R. In 1962 his client purchased a house on several small lots. He discovered approximately 20 years later that 3 of the small lots were not included on his deed. The matter was corrected through a declaratory judgment action.
(b) SCDSS v. Bowes, 89-CP-23-778. His client's child was taken into protective custody, because she had separated from her boyfriend and was living in the Rescue Mission. DSS thought she had a mental problem and kept the child in foster care for more than four years, although the client had completed every treatment plan DSS had established.
(c) Cox v. Galloway, a/k/a Richard, 88-CP-39-589. In this case his client in error placed her double wide mobile home on a portion of her neighbor's property. At the time both parties thought his client was on her property. The court allowed her to stay with compensation for use of the land.
(d) Lowery v. Lowery, 84-DR-23-2976. In this case his client, the mother, had served time in prison for bad checks. She regained custody from the father. The father had failed to pay child support during the period the bad checks were written.
(e) Pruitt v. Moss, 247 SE2d 324, 271 S.C. 305. This was the first case to his knowledge to find a contract in a Will in South Carolina. Although his name is not mentioned in the SE2d Reporter, he drafted the briefs and assisted Theo Mitchell in arguing the case before the Supreme Court of South Carolina.
18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Smith v. Smith, 251 SE2d 768. In 1979 the Respondent had moved for the same relief based on the same facts. The prior Order denying relief was res judicata.
(b) Smith v. Smith (same parties). It was dismissed under Rule 23 in 1980. The Respondent obtained additional child support, although she failed to make reasonable repair to the home awarded her by the Court, making it necessary for her and the child to move.
(c) Wright v. Sullivan, Memorandum Opinion No. 87-MO-070, Filed July 20, 1987. The court determined a case in accordance with Burns v. Burns, Opinion No. 0974, S. C. App., filed June 22, 1987. The court stated that the Family Court Judge is allowed broad discretion in a custody matter since he observed the witnesses and can best judge their credibility.
22. Public Office:
He is presently a member of the Greenville School Board. He was elected from District 25 to a 4-year term. He is former Chairman of the Administrative Committee and present Chairman of the Instruction Committee.
24. Any Occupation, Business or Profession Other Than the Practice of Law:
He was a realtor with Miller Real Estates, 231 Neely Ferry Road, Mauldin, South Carolina, 1986-1989. He was a part-time salesman who never sold property during this period. He also worked with Mrs. Miller at two other real estate offices.
27. He presently has no financial arrangements or business relationships that he believes could result in a conflict of interest. If a question arose, he would seek guidance from his superiors.
30. Tax Lien or Collection: He was slow in paying off his student loan. The debt was satisfied by him in 1987 or 1988.
33. His last physical was in October of 1990 at the Naval Air Station Atlanta Clinic, Marietta, Georgia 30060-5099. The occasion was the annual officer's physical.
39. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
He is a member of the South Carolina Bar and the Greenville County Bar. He has been a member of various committees from time to time but never held an office.
40. Civic, charitable, religious, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
He is a former Chairman of the St. Anthony Catholic School Board; a member of the Advisory Board of the Peace Center of Performing Arts; and a member of the Greenville County School Board.
41. As an Intelligence Officer in the U. S. Naval Reserve, he holds a Top Secret clearance. He coaches youth basketball at the Cleveland Street YMCA.
42. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Luann F. Wade, Loan Officer
Greenville, South Carolina City Employees FCU
P. O. Box 2207, Greenville, SC 29602
(b) Hebert Blassengale
101 Theresa Drive, Greenville, SC 29605
(c) Donald J. Sampson, Esquire
108 Lavinia Avenue, Greenville, SC 29601
(d) Jessee C. Beck
117 Cashmere Drive, Greenville, SC 29605
(e) James Kinlow
#7 Malone Street, Greenville, SC 29605
Q IT WILL BE DONE. WE HAVE CHECKED WITH THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE AND THEY REPORT NO COMPLAINTS HAVE EVER BEEN FILED AGAINST YOU. THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RECORDS ARE NEGATIVE, AS ARE THE GREENVILLE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND GREENVILLE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT RECORDS, AND THE SLED AND F.B.I. RECORDS. THE JUDGMENT ROLLS OF GREENVILLE COUNTY AND THE FEDERAL COURT RECORDS ARE ALSO NEGATIVE. YOUR HEALTH IS CONSIDERED GOOD?
A YES, SIR.
Q YOUR STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST SHOWS NO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. WE HAVE REVIEWED YOUR FINANCIAL NET WORTH STATEMENT AND CREDIT REPORTS AND THEY APPEAR SATISFACTORY. ON QUESTION 30 YOU MENTION LATE PAYMENT ON A STUDENT LOAN. THAT LOAN WAS SATISFIED?
A YES, SIR. IT WAS SATISFIED, IF NOT WITHIN THE 10-YEAR PERIOD, CLOSE TO THE 10-YEAR PERIOD. I GRADUATED LAW SCHOOL IN '76. IT WAS SATISFIED I BELIEVE IN 1988 TOTALLY.
Q WE RECEIVED NO COMPLAINTS AND NO WITNESSES HAVE DESIRED TO TESTIFY AS TO YOUR CANDIDACY, MR. JONES. WHAT PERCENT OF YOUR PRACTICE NOW IS FAMILY COURT RELATED?
A SIR, I BELIEVE I APPEAR IN FAMILY COURT ABOUT 40 PERCENT OF THE TIME. THE REMAINDER OF CASES INVOLVE STATE AND FEDERAL COURT, AND, IF THE COMMITTEE DESIRES TO CHECK WITH THE VARIOUS JUDGES, YOU WILL SEE THAT I'M WELL THOUGHT OF IN THOSE COURTS.
Q CONCERNING THE QUESTION OF JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT, WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO AVOID THE PROBLEM OF SHORT TEMPEREDNESS ON THE BENCH, OR LACK OF PATIENCE, OR "ROBEITIS" AS WE CALL IT?
A SIR, I WOULD DO VARIOUS THINGS TO AVOID STRESS. ONE, I JOG OCCASIONALLY FOR SEVERAL REASONS, ONE TO STAY FIT FOR THE NAVAL RESERVE, THE OTHER TO RELIEVE STRESS. I PLAY BASKETBALL WITH MY SON. THE LAST GAME I PLAYED WAS LAST NIGHT AFTER I GOT HOME FROM WORK; TIME BEFORE THAT WAS THE NIGHT BEFORE. I LISTEN TO EASY LISTENING MUSIC, GARDEN AND PLAY CHESS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT HELP RELIEVE STRESS.
Q WHAT STEPS WOULD YOU TAKE TO MAKE SURE THAT LITIGANTS DIDN'T FEEL LIKE YOU WERE IMPATIENT OR UNINTERESTED IN THEIR PARTICULAR MATTER?
A SIR, JUST AS I DO ON THE GREENVILLE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, WHICH WE HAVE 51,000 STUDENTS, AND NATURALLY A HOST OF PARENTS AND OTHER WELL WISHERS, AND SOME DETRACTORS, I LISTEN TO EVERYBODY WHO HAS AN OPINION AND TRY TO NOT DISMISS THEM IN A WAY THAT WOULD--EVEN THOUGH I OCCASIONALLY DO NOT--WELL, LATELY IT'S BEEN MORE THAN OCCASIONALLY, I DO NOT AGREE WITH THEIR OPINIONS, INCLUDING SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE, BUT I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DEAL WITH THEM IN A POSITIVE MANNER BY LISTENING TO THEM, MAKING NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ONES WHO ARE VERY POOR AND THE ONES WHO ARE QUITE WEALTHY.
Q DO YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE WORKLOAD REQUIREMENTS OF THE FAMILY COURT WHICH WOULD MEAN YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE AVAILABLE ON SOME WEEKENDS AND FRIDAYS?
A NO, SIR. MY WORKLOAD, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM MY SUMMARY OF MY QUESTIONNAIRE, I HAVE AT LEAST THREE JOBS, NAVAL RESERVE, GREENVILLE SCHOOL BOARD, LEGAL SERVICES ATTORNEY, AND COACH "Y" BASKETBALL. MY SON WAS TALKING TO ME YESTERDAY ABOUT HIS SUMMER LEAGUE IS STARTING. MY WIFE SAYS I COME TO VISIT EVERY NOW AND THEN.
SENATOR POPE: WOULD THE COMMITTEE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR MR. JONES?
REPRESENTATIVE GENTRY: NO QUESTIONS.
Q ARE YOU IN THE SAME LEGAL SERVICES WITH MR. JENKINS?
A YES, I AM.
Q YOU ARE A STAFF ATTORNEY?
A YES, I AM.
Q HE IS THE DIRECTOR?
A YES.
Q IS HE CONSIDERED TO BE YOUR BOSS?
A YES, SIR, HE IS.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN: I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
A I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MS. SATTERWHITE FOR HER HELP IN THIS MATTER.
SENATOR POPE: NEXT IS AMY C. SUTHERLAND. AMY C. SUTHERLAND, FIRST BEING DULY SWORN, TESTIFIES AS FOLLOWS:
Q MS. SUTHERLAND, YOU HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY?
A YES, SIR, I HAVE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
Q IS IT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q DOESN'T NEED ANY MODIFICATION?
A NO, SIR.
Q YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO US MAKING IT A PART OF THE RECORD?
A NO, SIR.
1. Amy C. Sutherland
Home Address: Business Address:
15 Boxwood Lane 501 East McBee Avenue, Suite 108
Greenville, SC 29601 P. O. Box 10292
Greenville, SC 29603
2. She was born in Greenville, South Carolina, on August 17, 1954. She is presently 36 years old.
Social Security Number: ***-**-*****
4. She was married to Joseph Jerrold Watson on February 12, 1983. She has two children: Robert Asher, age 5, and Mary Elizabeth, age 2.
5. Military Service: None
6. She attended Emory University from 1972 through 1976 and was awarded a Bachelor of Science degree in nursing. She attended Cumberland School of Law at Samford University, 1977 through 1980, and was awarded a Juris Doctor degree.
7. At Emory University she was President, Freshman Dorm, 1972-1973; Delta Delta Delta Sorority, 1972-1976; and Secretary of Delta Delta Delta, Alpha Omega Chapter, 1975-1976. At Cumberland School of Law at Samford University, she was on the Moot Court Board, 1978-1980, and in Mock Trial Competition, 1978-1979.
9. Courses Taught or Lectures Given: She has taught courses in Criminal Law, Evidence, Prisons and Criminal Procedure at Greenville Technical College, Greenville, South Carolina.
12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
May, 1980 - Assistant Solicitor for the Thirteenth
April, 1983 Judicial Circuit, Greenville County. Hired by William W. Wilkins, III, and continued as an Assistant Solicitor under the tenure of William B. Traxler, Jr. Handled a large load of administrative duties in addition to a full criminal case load. Handled Extraditions, Bond Estreatments and functioned as a liaison from the Solicitor's Office to all Magistrates' Offices in the County. In her final year in the Solicitor's Office, she was the Docket Coordinator, handling the flow of all criminal cases disposed of by that office.
April, 1983 - She was employed as an Associate August, 1985 with the firm of Ashmore, Stilwell and Hunter in Greenville, South Carolina. Handled general civil cases, including Domestic, Real Estate, Contract and Probate work. She also was appointed as a Public Defender Attorney by the County of Greenville for 1983-1984.
August, 1985 - Sole practitioner handling Domestic
March, 1991 Relations cases, Wills, Probate work,Personal Injury and Business Tort matters.
March, 1991 - present Merged her practice with two other attorneys to form the law firm of Ashmore, Sutherland and Rabon. Continued to handle primarily Domestic Relations matters, but also some Probate and Personal Injury actions.
14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - One Appearance
State - Including appearances in Family Court and Circuit Court. She has appeared on several hundred occasions with an average frequency of appearances in Family Court of 2-3 times per week.
Other - Probate Court in Greenville County, one trial; Office of Hearings and Appeals of the Social Security Administration, 2 trials; District Court in North Carolina, approximately 6 appearances
15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 10%
Criminal - 0% (She is prevented from practicing criminal defense work due to her husband's position as Circuit Solicitor for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit.)
Domestic - 90%
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 01%
Non-jury - 99%
She was sole counsel in 99% of the cases that she tried. She appeared as associate counsel in approximately 1% of the cases tried.
17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Timothy W. Anthony v. Patricia Lynn Anthony, (General Court of Justice, District Court Division, State of North Carolina, Docket #90-CVD-47). This involved a trial in another state; primary issue was custody of a five-year-old child. She represented a South Carolina resident (wife) against local North Carolina litigant (husband). She succeeded in obtaining transfer of custody for her client.
(b) Monica Thackston v. Tony Thackston, (Family Court for Spartanburg County, Docket #91-DR-42-2258). This involved custody of a two-year-old female. She obtained custody for the father by showing morals of mother to be less than adequate.
(c) Dewey Harold Powell v. Lula Farr "Tommie" Lunsford, (Family Court for Greenville County, Docket #89-DR-23-820). This involved the issue of common law marriage. She represented "husband" in bid to have his twenty-two year relationship with the "wife" declared a marriage. Court found no marriage in spite of the length of relationship.
(d) Nellie B. Cehen v. Bobby Ray Cehen, (Family Court for Greenville County, Docket #86-DR-23-4046). This involved a remand of case from Court of Appeals. The Trial Court asked to redetermine alimony in light of its decision to force the sale of marital home. She obtained an increase in alimony for the client.
(e) Elizabeth Edge v. Emmanuel Karem, (Family Court for Greenville County, Docket #88-DR-23-444). She represented the Defendant-Husband in wife's bid for an increase in support and numerous other requests for relief. She fended off most of the wife's requests.
18. Five (5) civil appeals:
She has handled two civil appeals, both arising from the Family Court in Greenville County; however she does not recall the citations of these cases. The files for these cases are stored with the law firm with which she was previously employed. Both matters were handled approximately 7-8 years ago.
20. Judicial Office:
She has served as an Assistant Municipal Judge for the City of Mauldin in Greenville County, South Carolina, since 1983. She was appointed to this position at the time she was employed as an Associate with Ashmore, Stilwell and Hunter inasmuch as one of the senior partners, Randolph Hunter, served as the Municipal Judge for Mauldin. During her tenure as an Associate with Ashmore, Stilwell and Hunter, she presided over regular sessions of Criminal and Traffic Court, and she also had an opportunity to hear occasional jury trials. Since going into sole practice, she fills in for Mr. Hunter approximately 2-3 times per year in Traffic and Criminal Court. The jurisdiction for this Court is 30 days confinement or a fine of up to $200, plus costs.
She has served as an Assistant Municipal Judge for the City of Greenville, Greenville County, South Carolina, since 1988. She presides over Criminal Court and Traffic Court approximately once a month. She was appointed to this position. The jurisdiction of this Court is 30 days imprisonment or up to a $200 fine.
24. Any Occupation, Business or Profession Other Than the Practice of Law: Prior to attending law school, she was a registered nurse. Upon graduation from college, she was employed as an RN in the Emergency Department of Greenville General Hospital from September, 1976 through August, 1977. In addition, she obtained her nursing license for the State of Alabama and, while attending law school full time, she was employed as a registered nurse through Kelly Services, Inc. She took nursing assignments in critical care areas in various hospitals in Birmingham from September, 1978 through December, 1979.
33. Her last physical examination was in April of 1991. Her examining physician was Dr. J. David Smith, Ob-Gyn Associates, 331 Mills Avenue, Greenville, South Carolina 29601.
35. She wears glasses to correct her vision since ten years of age.
39. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association; Greenville County Bar Association; South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association; Greenville Professional Women's Forum
40. Civic, charitable, religious, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
Junior League of Greenville, 1984-1987; Gateway House, 1984-1990, served on the Board of Directors of this organization whose purpose it is to assist the chronically mentally ill of Greenville County to find a means of becoming productive citizens, served as Secretary of the Board for two years, President-Elect for one year, President during 1988, also chaired major fund-raising event for the organization in 1990; Delta Delta Delta Alumni Organization
41. She is married to Joe Watson, Solicitor for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit. His office handles the prosecution of juveniles in the Family Courts of Greenville and Pickens Counties. His office also represents the Department of Social Services in the same counties in their Family Court proceedings. This relationship could present the appearance of partiality, and thus, she should probably not preside over juvenile cases or cases involving DSS in Greenville and Pickens Counties.
42. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Donald B. Watson, Vice-President and Marketing Officer
BB&T
P. O. Box 6807, Greenville, SC 29606-6807
(b) Honorable William W. Wilkins, Jr.
P. O. Box 10857, Greenville, SC 29603
(c) Rex L. Carter, Esquire
P. O. Box 10828, Greenville, SC 29603
(d) Randolph W. Hunter, Esquire
P. O. Box 26897, Greenville, SC 29616
(e) James H. Price, III, Esquire
644 East Washington Street, Greenville, SC 29601
Q IT WILL BE DONE. THE STAFF HAS CHECKED WITH THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE AND THEY REPORT NO COMPLAINTS OR CHARGES OF ANY KIND HAVE EVER BEEN FILED AGAINST YOU. THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION REPORTS NO RECORD OF REPRIMANDS AGAINST YOU--I THINK YOU ARE AN ASSOCIATE MUNICIPAL JUDGE FROM GREENVILLE?
A YES.
Q AND THE RECORDS OF THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ARE NEGATIVE. LIKEWISE WITH THE GREENVILLE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT THERE. SLED AND F.B.I. RECORDS ARE ALSO NEGATIVE. THE JUDGMENT ROLLS OF GREENVILLE COUNTY AND THE FEDERAL COURT RECORDS WERE CHECKED AND THEY ARE ALSO NEGATIVE. YOUR HEALTH IS CONSIDERED TO BE GOOD?
A YES, SIR.
Q YOUR STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST, OR SOMEWHERE IN THIS PACKET, IT WAS NOTED THAT YOU SAID THERE MAY BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BECAUSE OF YOUR HUSBAND'S POSITION?
A YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q WOULD YOU ELABORATE FOR THE RECORD ABOUT THAT?
A YES, SIR. AS MANY OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW, MY HUSBAND IS JOE WATSON AND HE IS THE SOLICITOR FOR THE 13TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT THAT COMPRISES GREENVILLE AND PICKENS COUNTIES. ASSISTANTS IN HIS OFFICE HANDLE THE PROSECUTION OF JUVENILE CASES IN FAMILY COURT IN THOSE TWO COUNTIES, AND IT ALSO HANDLES THE PROSECUTION OF D.S.S. ABUSE AND NEGLECT CASES FOR BOTH GREENVILLE COUNTY D.S.S. AND PICKENS COUNTY D.S.S. DUE TO THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY THAT MIGHT ARISE IN HIS CONNECTION WITH THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE AND MY SERVING ON THE BENCH, I WOULD PROBABLY--I WOULD FEEL IT MORE WISE TO EXCUSE MYSELF FROM HEARING THOSE TYPES OF CASES SIMPLY WITHIN THOSE TWO COUNTIES. NATURALLY IT WOULD NOT PREVENT ME FROM HANDLING THOSE TYPES OF CASES IN ALL THE OTHER COUNTIES TO WHICH I WOULD BE EXPECTED TO BE ASSIGNED BY COURT ADMINISTRATION. I DON'T FEEL LIKE THE CONFLICT WOULD CREATE ANY SORT OF BACKLOG OR CLOG IN DOCKETS IN EITHER OF THOSE COUNTIES. TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, ON THE GREENVILLE COUNTY SIDE FAMILY COURT DOWN THERE RESERVES FOR THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE A HALF A DAY FOR THE SCHEDULING OF JUVENILE CASES. IT ALSO RESERVES A FULL DAY FOR THE SCHEDULING OF D.S.S. CASES. THOSE OF YOU WHO PRACTICE IN GREENVILLE KNOW THAT GREENVILLE IS A BUSY FAMILY COURT CIRCUIT AND HAS THREE JUDGES WORKING IN THAT CIRCUIT ALMOST ALL THE TIME. FREQUENTLY THERE ARE FOUR JUDGES. ON THE AVERAGE OF THREE JUDGES WORKING PER WEEK. THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 15 TRIAL DAYS IF YOU TAKE THE FIVE DAYS TIMES THE THREE JUDGES. SO THE ONE AND A HALF DAYS OF COURT TIME SCHEDULE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 10 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WORKLOAD THAT THE FAMILY COURT HANDLES. NOW, THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS. CERTAINLY IF YOU TOOK THE ACTUAL CASES THAT ARE HANDLED IN THOSE TWO TYPES OF AREAS UP AGAINST THE DOMESTIC RELATION CASES, THE NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES MAY BE DIFFERENT, BUT I AM LOOKING AT IT PURELY FROM THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT ANY JUDGE IS GOING TO BE SCHEDULED IN THOSE TWO AREAS. IN SCHEDULING TIME I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE IN TELLING YOU IT'S A 10 PERCENT FACTOR. I HAVE IN THE PAST BEEN IN A POSITION IN GREENVILLE TO SEE SOME OTHER POTENTIAL CONFLICTS, IN FACT, COMING OUT OF THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE. WHEN I WAS AN ASSISTANT SOLICITOR, JUDGE PRICE MANY OF YOU MAY REMEMBER WAS ON THE BENCH, AND HIS SON, JAMES H. PRICE, III, CHIP PRICE AS HE IS KNOWN, WAS HIRED IN THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE BY BILLY WILKINS WHO WAS THEN MY BOSS AS WELL. OBVIOUSLY, CHIP COULD NOT HANDLE CASES IN FRONT OF HIS FATHER. THE SAME TYPE OF CONFLICT AROSE THERE BETWEEN FATHER AND SON AS YOU ARE LOOKING AT HERE BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE. THAT WAS HANDLED SIMPLY BY NOT SCHEDULING CHIP PRICE'S CASES IN FRONT OF HIS FATHER. NOW CERTAINLY SOME PEOPLE COULD MAKE THE ARGUMENT, WELL, JUSTICE WASN'T DISPENSED AS QUICKLY IF THE SON'S CASES COULD NOT BE PRESENTED IN FRONT OF THE FATHER, BUT THERE WERE NO COMPLAINTS, NO ATTORNEYS EVER COMPLAINED THAT I KNEW OF, AND I WAS ACTUALLY IN THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE AT THE TIME THIS CONFLICT EXISTED BECAUSE CHIP PRICE WAS WORKING THERE AS AN ASSISTANT AT THE TIME I WAS HIRED AND HIS DAD WAS STILL ALIVE AND SERVING ON THE BENCH. SO THERE ARE WAYS THOSE KINDS OF CONFLICTS CAN BE RESOLVED, AND I DON'T FEEL IT IS GOING TO IN ANY WAY HAMPER MY EFFECTIVENESS AS A JUDGE.
Q THERE ARE THREE FAMILY COURT JUDGES IN GREENVILLE?
A GENERALLY THERE ARE THREE SERVING THERE ALL THE TIME. NOW, THE RESIDENT JUDGES MAY NOT BE THERE. GREENVILLE TENDS TO ROTATE QUITE A FEW OUT OF TOWN JUDGES. EVEN WITH THE CUT-DOWN OF FUNDS FOR TRAVELING AND PER DIEM WE ARE STILL GETTING A LOT OF JUDGES FROM ADJOINING COUNTIES LIKE SPARTANBURG, LAURENS, OCONEE, ANDERSON, PLACES LIKE THAT.
Q I SEE YOUR FAMILY COURT EXPERIENCE IS PRETTY EXTENSIVE. YOU HAVE ABOUT 90 PERCENT OF YOUR TIME IS WITH THE FAMILY COURT?
A YES. FOR THE PAST SEVEN YEARS I HAVE DONE ALMOST NOTHING BUT FAMILY COURT WORK IN JUST ABOUT EVERY FACET I CAN THINK OF. I EVEN SERVE AS A GUARDIAN IN D.S.S. ABUSE AND NEGLECT CASES.
Q WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE FINANCIAL NET WORTH STATEMENT AND CREDIT REPORTS AND THEY ARE SATISFACTORY. NO ONE HAS NOTIFIED US OF ANY DESIRE TO BE PRESENT AND NO COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. CONCERNING THE PROBLEM OF JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT, WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO AVOID BEING SHORT FUSED ON THE BENCH OR ILL-TEMPERED?
A WELL, MR. CHAIRMAN, EVERYBODY IS HUMAN AND I DARE SAY EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE EVERYBODY'S TEMPER WOULD RUN SHORT AND I MAY FALL ILL TO THAT AS WELL AS THE NEXT HUMAN BEING, BUT I THINK IF I CAN MAINTAIN MY MEMORY, MY "ROBEITIS" PROBLEM IS GOING TO BE KEPT TO A MINIMUM. I HAVE BEEN GOING INTO FAMILY COURT IN GREENVILLE AND MANY OTHER COUNTIES IN THIS AREA, EVEN IN NORTH CAROLINA I HAVE HAD OCCASIONS TO APPEAR ON ONE CASE, FOR THE PAST SEVEN YEARS. I HAVE BEEN ON THE RECEIVING END OF A LOT OF BAD MOODS, BAD TEMPERS, JUDGES WHO MAY NOT HAVE GOTTEN ENOUGH SLEEP THE NIGHT BEFORE, JUDGES WHO THE CASE AHEAD OF OURS MAY HAVE BEEN PARTICULARLY TOUGH AND THEY ARE MAYBE VENTING SOME FRUSTRATION ON THE NEXT POOR SOULS THAT COME BEFORE THEM. IF I CAN SIMPLY REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS LIKE WHEN I WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT BENCH, THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT DESK WHEN I WAS AN ATTORNEY WHEN I WAS ON THE RECEIVING END OF THAT, WHEN I SAW HOW MY CLIENTS WOULD SUFFER THE SAME HUMILIATION I WOULD SUFFER IN BEING BARKED AT BY A PERSON WHO MAY HAVE BEEN IN A BAD MOOD OR MAY HAVE BEEN ANGRY OR UPSET, I THINK I CAN KEEP MY "ROBEITIS" TO A MINIMUM. I GUESS ANOTHER AREA WHERE I FEEL LIKE I HAVE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF EXPERIENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE IS SERVING AS A CITY COURT JUDGE. THOSE ARE RELATIVELY SMALL CASES. THEY ARE MOSTLY TRAFFIC MATTERS AND MAGISTRATE'S COURT LEVEL CRIMINAL CASES. MOST OF THE LITIGANTS WHO COME INTO THAT TYPE OF COURTROOM, THEY ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY AN ATTORNEY. THEY ARE PRO SE. THEY ARE COMING IN TO GET THEIR DAY IN COURT, AND THAT IS ONE THING I HAVE LEARNED IN SERVING AS A JUDGE IN THAT SMALL CAPACITY, ANYBODY THAT COMES INTO ANY KIND OF COURTROOM THEY ARE COMING THERE BECAUSE THEY REALLY EXPECT THAT--THEY HAVE HEARD SO MUCH ON TELEVISION AND GROWING UP ALL THEIR LIVES THAT WE HAVE THE BEST JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN THE WORLD AND THEY EXPECT TO SEE IT. THEY ARE VERY DISMAYED WHEN THEY ENCOUNTER A CURMUDGEON FOR A JUDGE. IT TOTALLY DASHES ALL THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS THEY HAVE OF WHAT OUR SYSTEM STANDS FOR. BEING ABLE TO DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THEM WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THEM GIVES YOU AN EVEN CLOSER FEEL FOR HOW SINCERELY PEOPLE REALLY BELIEVE OUR SYSTEM OF JUSTICE IS ESTABLISHED. SO IF I CAN KEEP MY MEMORY, I THINK I WILL BE IN GOOD SHAPE.
Q IS YOUR SCHEDULE SUCH THAT YOU WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE FREQUENT, OR AT LEAST IRREGULAR, LONG HOURS OR LATE NIGHTS THAT MIGHT BE REQUIRED IN FAMILY COURT?
A NO, SIR. I WAS A SOLE PRACTITIONER UNTIL JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO, AND FOR THE PAST SIX YEARS HAVE RUN MY OWN BUSINESS, AND ANY OF YOU THAT HAVE BEEN A SOLE PRACTITIONER IN YOUR LAW PRACTICES WOULD KNOW, OR RUN YOUR OWN BUSINESS AS A NON-LAWYER, WOULD KNOW THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO KEEP IT RUNNING, YOU DO IT ALL AND YOU WORK THE HOURS. I AM ALREADY WORKING THOSE HOURS, WEEKEND HOURS AND LATE EVENING HOURS. I GET HOME LATER THAN MY HUSBAND ALMOST EVERY NIGHT OF THE WEEK, SO I AM AROUND.
Q DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE?
A NO, SIR. I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
SENATOR POPE: HOW ABOUT THE COMMITTEE, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
Q MS. SUTHERLAND, I LIKED YOUR ANSWER TO REMEMBER WHERE YOU CAME FROM. IF JUDGES WOULD REMEMBER THEY WERE ONCE LAWYERS, IT WOULD MAKE IT A WHOLE LOT EASIER.
SENATOR POPE: THANKS A LOT.
MICHAEL F. TALLEY, FIRST BEING DULY SWORN, TESTIFIES AS FOLLOWS:
Q AND YOU ARE MR. MICHAEL F. TALLEY?
A YES, I AM.
Q MR. TALLEY, YOU HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY?
A YES, I HAVE.
Q IS IT CORRECT?
A IT'S CORRECT.
Q YOU DON'T NEED TO MAKE ANY AMENDMENTS?
A NO.
Q YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO US MAKING IT PART OF THE RECORD?
A NO OBJECTION.
1. Michael F. Talley
Home Address: Business Address:
204 Boling Road 206 Green Avenue
Greenville, SC 29611 Greenville, SC 29601
2. He was born in Chesterfield County, South Carolina, on August 14, 1945. He is presently 45 years old.
Social Security Number: ***-**-*****
4. He was married to Dianne Wright on May 24, 1980. He has two children: Michanna, age 8, and Michael F., Jr., age 4.
5. Military Service: None
6. He attended South Carolina State College, 1962-1966, B.A. Degree; Howard University, 1969-1970, M.A. Degree; Columbia University, June-July, 1973, pursued two doctoral courses while participating in program for college professors and/or instructors; Howard University School of Law, 1973-1976, J.D. Degree.
7. While at South Carolina State College, he participated in the French Club, the Gamma Mu Honor Society and Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, 1964-1966.
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
During the past five years, he has attended numerous Continuing Legal Education Seminar courses in excess of twelve (12) hours annually.
9. Courses taught or lectures given: He taught Business Law on a part-time basis at Greenville Technical College in Greenville, South Carolina from 1983 to 1987 and during the winter quarter of 1989-1990.
10. Published Books or Articles: He has an Unpublished Master-of-Arts' Thesis in the Howard University's library entitled "The Relationship Between Haitians and American Negroes."
12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
1976-1977 The Law Office of John E. Bishop, Greenville, South Carolina - general practice
1977-1981 Talley, Green & Lewis Law Firm, Greenville, South Carolina - general practice
1981-1987 Talley & Lewis, Greenville, South Carolina - general practice
1987-present Sole Practitioner, Greenville, South Carolina - general practice
His private practice has included Family/Domestic Law, Probate Law, Property Law, Personal Injury, Criminal Law, Workers' Compensation, Civil Rights Litigation, such as Reapportionment/Voting Rights and Title VII. Also, Social Security.
14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - about one case a year
State - normally varies from one to several times a week
Other - (Bankruptcy) handles anywhere from five to ten a year
15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 60%
Criminal - 20%
Domestic - 20%
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 60%
Non-jury - 40%
He is almost always sole counsel or chief counsel. Also, he sometimes serves as an associate counsel on an infrequent basis.
17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Elizabeth Daniel v. Days Inn of America, Inc., et al., 356 SE2d 129 (1987). This case was significant in several particulars, such as (1) a Hotel owes a duty to a companion of a hotel guest who was raped by the guest and others to provide adequate hotel security measures; (2) an Innkeeper is not automatically exonerated from negligence when a criminal act is the actual cause of the invitee's injuries.
(b) Glymph v. Spartanburg General Hospital, 783 F2d 476 (C.A. 4th, 1986). This case was important for the fact that it held that attorney fees should be sparingly awarded to a prevailing defendant in a Title VII case and that it should not be based on post hoc reasoning which presumes an award based on the outcome. Also, it appears to hold that a Title VII plaintiff should not be required to pay attorney fees to a prevailing defendant if the plaintiff presents a prima facie case. Finally, this case reversed the District Court's ruling that the Title VII plaintiff had to pay $18,000 attorney fees to the prevailing defendant.
(c) Susan E. Holliday, et al. v. William Christopher Holliday, et al., 85-DR-23-168. This case was important because, after a two-day trial in Greenville Family Court on February 20-21, 1985, the plaintiff was able to be granted the custody of her minor son. At a prior temporary hearing, the plaintiff's mother-in-law and step father-in-law were granted temporary custody of her minor son.
(d) Spartanburg NAACP, et al. v. City of Spartanburg, Civil Action 7:87-505-17. This case was significant because it changed the City of Spartanburg from At Large Voting Districts to Single Member Voting Districts.
(e) South Carolina NAACP, et al. v. Richard Riley, et al., Civil Action 81-2287-6. This case was significant, because it ensured that the voting districts for the South Carolina House of Representatives would be fairly and equitably drawn into fair and equitable Single Member Districts.
18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Carolyn Parthemos v. Nicholas Parthemos, 77-DR-42-1199. This case was appealed from the Spartanburg Family Court, March 30, 1978, and it was affirmed under Rule 23 by the South Carolina Supreme Court in its Memorandum Opinion, No. 79-93, on May 28, 1979.
(b) McBeth v. Bishop, 298 SE2d 441 (1982). This legal malpractice case was appealed from the Greenville Court of Common Pleas, and it was affirmed by the South Carolina Supreme Court on December 7, 1982.
(c) Hettie Davis Williams v. Curtis Davis, Memorandum Opinion 87-MO-028 (1987). This action, relative to a Real Property Easement by Necessity, was appealed from the Greenville Court of Common Pleas, and it was affirmed by the South Carolina Court of Appeals on April 6, 1987.
(d) Theo Walker Mitchell v. Multimedia, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion
No. 80-MO-33. This libel action was appealed from the Greenville Court of Common Pleas, and it was affirmed by the South Carolina Supreme Court under Rule 23 on January 3, 1980.
(e) Willis v. Bishop, 276 SE2d 310 (1981). This case was appealed from the Greenville Court of Common Pleas on June 2, 1980, and it was reported in 1981 at the above citation.
19. Five (5) criminal appeals:
(a) The State v. Roosevelt Eison, Jr., Memorandum Opinion 91-MO-82. This criminal case was appealed from Union County General Sessions Court on March 30, 1989, and the South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed the Appellant's conviction on March 4, 1991. A Petition for Rehearing is pending before the South Carolina Supreme Court.
(b) State v. Carrie Young Henderson, 87-46. This criminal case, resulting from a conviction in Spartanburg Magistrate Court on November 7, 1985, was appealed from Spartanburg Court on September 26, 1986, and the Appellant's conviction was affirmed by the South Carolina Supreme Court in August, 1987.
(c) State v. Darrell Hughey, 84-GS-23-3091 and 84-GS-23-3092. This case was appealed from Greenville Court of Common Pleas on November 26, 1984, and the case was affirmed in the South Carolina Supreme Court in January, 1986.
24. Any Occupation, Business or Profession Other Than the Practice of Law:
1983-1987 Greenville Technical College, Greenville, South Carolina, Part-Time Business Law Instructor
1973-1976 Howard University, Washington, DC, French Lab Instructor/Graduate Assistant
June-Aug. Presidential Clemency Board, The White House,
1975 Washington, DC Staff Attorney. His duties as a staff attorney were to represent persons who had received dishonorable discharges or who were draft evaders or had gone to Canada to escape the Vietnam War before a Presidential Clemency Panel in these person's attempts to receive Presidential pardons or some form of presidential clemency from some military and/or military draft infraction(s).
1971-1973 Tennessee State University, Nashville, Tennessee, French Instructor
1972-1973 Eagle University, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, French Instructor. During the 1972-1973 school year, he taught French for Tennessee State University on the military base at Fort Campbell, Kentucky as a part of a consortium consisting of several Universities in Tennessee and Kentucky under the name of "Eagle University."
1969-1970 Howard University, Washington, DC, French Lab. Instructor/Graduate Assistant
1966-1969 Wilson High School, Florence, South Carolina, French and Spanish Teacher
Spring, Wilkinson High School, Orangeburg, South
1966 Carolina, Spanish Teacher
28. He was arrested in or about October, 1963, in Orangeburg, South Carolina during a Civil Rights' protest march.
30. Tax Lien: Over time, federal and state tax liens have been filed against him, but they have all been paid and resolved. He defaulted on a student loan around 1982-1983, but it has been paid in full and resolved. He has never filed for bankruptcy.
31. Sued:
(a) He was the subject of a lawsuit in 1983, resulting from an automobile accident. The lawsuit was dismissed once the other party's attorney was informed that his client's insurance company had already settled his claims for him.
(b) He was the defendant in an action in 1983, resulting from his law office's lease after he purchased his law office in 1981. This indebtedness has been paid in full and satisfied.
(c) He was the subject of a foreclosure action in 1985, relative to his law office. He brought his mortgage current within several weeks, and the action was dismissed.
(d) He was the subject of a lawsuit in 1986 by Greenville General Hospital. His wife developed toxemia prior to the birth of his first child, and she had an extended hospital stay. Equitable Insurance Company refused to honor their insurance policy. This claim was paid and satisfied prior to judgment.
(e) He defaulted on his student loan in 1982-1983, and he was the subject of an action in 1985. It has been paid in full and satisfied.
(f) In February, 1990, two (2) of his checks were misplaced and, while he was thinking his mortgage was current, South Carolina Federal instituted a foreclosure action against him. He immediately brought this mortgage current, and this action was dismissed. (He stopped payment on his checks, and they were never recovered.)
(g) Brief Printing Company filed an action against him in 1988 for monies owed relative to the printing costs of an appeal in a Title VII action. All monies have been paid in full, and same has been satisfied.
33. His health is good. His last physical was September 13, 1990, by Dr. Levi Kirkland, 402 Ansel Street, Greenville, South Carolina.
35. He became ill with polio when he was around 12 years old, which has left him with a limp.
39. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association and National Bar Association
40. Civic, charitable, religious, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
Greenville Chamber of Commerce; Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity; Allen Temple A.M.E. Church, Greenville, South Carolina
42. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Bobby Miller, Vice President
South Carolina National Bank
P. O. Box 969, Greenville, SC 29602
(b) Fletcher N. Smith, Jr., Esquire
P. O. Box 10496, F.S., Greenville, SC 29603
(c) Alex Kinlaw, Jr., Esquire
309 Mills Avenue, Greenville, SC 29605
(d) Ernest N. Irby, Assistant Vice President
American Federal
P. O. Box 1268, Greenville, SC 29602-1268
(e) David Crockett Dodson, Esquire
10 East Avenue, Greenville, SC 29601
Q WE WILL DO THAT. THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE HAVE REPORTED THAT NO COMPLAINTS HAVE EVER BEEN FILED AGAINST YOU. THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RECORDS ARE NEGATIVE, AS ARE THE GREENVILLE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT OF GREENVILLE. SLED AND F.B.I. RECORDS WERE CHECKED AND THEY ARE NEGATIVE. IN LOOKING AT THE JUDGMENT ROLLS, YOU WERE VERY CANDID IN REVEALING NUMEROUS LIENS OR JUDGMENTS THAT WERE FILED, AND I BELIEVE YOU INDICATED, BECAUSE WE DO AN INDEPENDENT CHECK AND OUR RECORDS DID NOT REVEAL ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT YOU HAD ALREADY REPORTED, BUT YOU DID HAVE A NUMBER OF SUITS. ALL OF THOSE HAVE BEEN SATISFIED?
A ALL OF THEM WERE SATISFIED.
Q I BELIEVE ONE OF THEM WAS A STUDENT LOAN, ANOTHER WAS A FORECLOSURE ACTION.
A THAT WAS DISMISSED.
Q THAT WAS A MISTAKE I BELIEVE?
A YES.
Q YOU INDICATED A CHECK HAD BEEN MISPLACED AND YOU IMMEDIATELY MADE THE CHECK GOOD AND THE CASE WAS DISMISSED?
A YES.
Q YOUR HEALTH IS GOOD?
A YES.
Q YOUR STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST SHOWS NO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AND THE CREDIT REPORT, AS I INDICATED, SHOWS THAT YOU SATISFIED ALL THOSE SEVERAL DEBT SITUATIONS THAT YOU IDENTIFIED. WE RECEIVED NO COMPLAINTS AND NO WITNESSES DESIRE TO BE PRESENT TODAY. WHAT PERCENT OF YOUR PRACTICE NOW IS FAMILY COURT?
A I WOULD THINK ABOUT 20 PERCENT. AT ONE TIME IT WAS PROBABLY 40 PERCENT IN THE EARLY '80S.
Q CONCERNING JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT AND "ROBEITIS," YOU WILL BE ASKED THE SAME QUESTIONS THE OTHERS HAVE, WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU MAINTAINED AN EVEN JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT AND AVOIDED THE "ROBEITIS" SYNDROME?
A I WOULD HAVE TO REMEMBER IT'S A VERY STRESSFUL SITUATION FOR LITIGANTS AND THAT THEY NEED TO BE TREATED FAIRLY. ALSO I NEED TO REMEMBER FOR 10 AND A HALF YEARS I STOOD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT BENCH AND I GOT SOME VERY HOT RECEPTIONS FROM THE COURT SOMETIMES AND KNOW THAT PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE TREATED FAIRLY. ALSO THE LAWYERS HAVE A RIGHT TO BE TREATED COURTEOUSLY AND FAIRLY.
Q AS FAR AS THE WEEKEND AND LATE HOURS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED OF A FAMILY COURT JUDGE, WOULD THERE BE ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR SCHEDULE OR LIFESTYLE THAT WOULD CREATE A PROBLEM FOR YOU TO BE AVAILABLE?
A NO, SIR. BASICALLY I WORK SEVEN DAYS A WEEK RIGHT NOW.
SENATOR POPE: DOES THE COMMITTEE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. TALLEY?
SENATOR LOURIE: NO.
Q DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER STATEMENT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE?
A NO, SIR.
SENATOR POPE: THANK YOU, MR. TALLEY. THE LAST APPLICANT IS KATHRYN WILLIAMS. KATHRYN WILLIAMS, FIRST BEING DULY SWORN, TESTIFIES AS FOLLOWS:
Q FOR THE RECORD YOU ARE KATHRYN WILLIAMS?
A YES, I AM.
Q YOU HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY?
A YES.
Q IS IT ACCURATE AND CORRECT?
A YES.
Q IT NEEDS NO MODIFICATION?
A NO.
Q YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO US MAKING IT PART OF THE RECORD?
A NOT AT ALL.
1. Kathryn Williams
Home Address: Business Address:
#8 Hidden Hills Court P. O. Box 10693
Greenville, SC 29605 Greenville, SC 29603
2. She was born in Gastonia, North Carolina, on October 26, 1957. She is presently 33 years old.
Social Security Number: ***-**-*****
4. She is single.
5. Military Service: None
6. She attended Clemson University, Bachelor of Arts, 1979, and the University of South Carolina, Juris Doctor, 1982.
7. Significant Activities: First Place, 4th Circuit Regional Competition, National Appellate; Advocacy Competition, 1981; Moot Court Board; Phi Delta Phi Legal Fraternity.
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
She has obtained much more than the required hours in every year since admission to the bar. These hours have been divided among family law, workers' compensation, trial and appellate practice, and ethics seminars.
9. Courses Taught or Lectures Given: She was Instructor on Workers' Compensation, Paralegal Program, Greenville Technical College, 1987; Moderator, CLE Seminar, Jury Selection and Opening Statement, 1/29/88; Speaker, CLE Seminar, Discovery in State & Federal Courts, Greenville Technical College, 12/20/85.
10. Published Books or Articles: Contributing author to South Carolina Jurisprudence, scheduled for publication 1991
12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
Law Clerk, The Honorable Julius B. Ness, 1983
Law Clerk, The Honorable G. Ross Anderson, 1984
Associate, Foster, Covington & Patrick, 1985-1987, concentrating in Workers' Compensation, Personal Injury Litigation, and Family Law
Sole Practitioner, 1987 to present, concentrating in Family Law, Workers' Compensation
Personal Injury Litigation
14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - 5%
State - 95%
Other -
15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 60%
Criminal -
Domestic - 40%
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 40%
Non-jury - 60%
Sole Counsel
17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Anders v. Anders, 285 SC 512, 331 SE2d 340 (1985). This was a custody case in which she represented the father. The mother accused the father of physical cruelty, and the father accused the mother of adultery. The trial court granted the father a divorce on the ground of adultery and awarded custody of the child to him. This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court. The case is significant to her because it is the first case she argued before the Supreme Court, and because it involved numerous evidentiary questions on the physical cruelty and adultery issues.
(b) Jones v. Jones, Mem. Op. No. 85-MO-082 (Ct. App. 1985). This was a custody case in which she represented the mother. The mother lost custody at the original trial because of her adultery. Upon her motion, the trial judge superseded his own order. After remand by the Court of Appeals and a new trial, the mother was awarded custody. This is the only case she has known of in which a judge superseded his own order. It involved the sometimes difficult issue of a parent's illicit relationship interfering with his or her ability to properly raise a child.
(c) Peeks v. Peeks, Mem. Op. No. 90-MO-133 (Ct. App. 1990). This was a custody case in which she represented the grandparents who were awarded custody in a battle against the natural mother. This decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, and was significant because it dealt with the factors to be considered by a trial judge when awarding custody to someone other than a natural parent.
(d) State v. Griffin, 89-JU-23-206207 (1989). This was a juvenile criminal case in which she represented the juvenile who was charged with Disturbing Schools and Assault and Battery of a High and Aggravated Nature. She negotiated a sentence of probation with community service. It was significant in that it gave her experience in the area of juvenile criminal cases in Family Court.
(e) Leone v. Dilullo, 294 SC 410, 365 SE2d 39 (1988). This was a termination of parental rights case in which she was appointed to represent the mother. It was significant because it involved such a final determination of familial relationships. It is also significant to her in that her efforts on the mother's behalf were publicly commended by the Court of Appeals.
18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Anders v. Anders, 285 SC 512, 331 SE2d 340 (1985).
(b) Jones v. Jones, Mem. Op. No. 85-MO-082 (Ct. App. 1985).
(c) Peeks v. Peeks, Mem. Op. No. 90-MO-133 (Ct. App. 1990).
(d) Leone v. Dilulo, 294 SC 410, 365 SE2d 39 (1988).
(e) Malone v. Malone, 89-DR-23-4954, pending before the South Carolina Supreme Court.
30. Tax Lien: Tax lien as a result of misapplied withholding payment.
33. Her health is excellent. Her last physical examination was April 10, 1991. Her examining physician was Dr. Peter G. Manos, 315 W. Butler Road, Mauldin, South Carolina 29662.
39. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association, 1982 to present; American Bar Association, 1982 to present; Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of South Carolina, 1985-1988; South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association, 1985 to present; Co-Chairman, Continuing Legal Education Committee, 1989-1990; Chairman, Amicus Committee, 1989 to present; American Trial Lawyers Association, 1985 to present
40. Civic, charitable, religious, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
American Cancer Society, Board of Directors; Chairman, Legacies Committee, Unity Presbyterian Church
42. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) James W. Childers, III, Senior Vice President
United Savings Bank
P. O. Box 25279, Greenville, SC 29616
(b) Honorable J. B. Ness
P. O. Box 365, Barnwell, SC 29812
(c) Richard C. Foster, Esquire
P. O. Box 2146, Greenville, SC 29602
(d) H. Mills Gallivan, Esquire
P. O. Box 10589, Greenville, SC 29603
(e) Don R. Moorhead, Esquire
P. O. Box 332, Greenville, SC 29602
Q WE WILL DO THAT. THE STAFF HAS CHECKED WITH THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE AND THEY REPORT NO COMPLAINTS OR CHARGES OF ANY KIND HAVE EVER BEEN FILED AGAINST YOU. THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RECORDS ARE NEGATIVE. THE GREENVILLE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, THEIR RECORDS ARE NEGATIVE. SLED AND F.B.I. RECORDS SHOW NOTHING. THE JUDGMENT ROLLS OF GREENVILLE COUNTY WERE CHECKED. YOU REPORTED A TAX LIEN THAT WAS SATISFIED LAST YEAR I THINK?
A YES, SIR. THAT WAS FOR--IT WAS A WITHHOLDING PAYMENT THAT THE TAX COMMISSION MISAPPLIED, THAT THEY APPLIED IT TO THE WRONG QUARTER. WHEN I CALLED IT TO THEIR ATTENTION, THEY ADMITTED THEIR MISTAKE BUT THE LIEN WAS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS AND THE ONLY REMEDY WAS TO MARK IT SATISFIED.
Q THEY DID THAT?
A THEY DID.
Q FEDERAL COURT RECORDS ARE NEGATIVE. YOUR HEALTH IS CONSIDERED TO BE EXCELLENT?
A YES.
Q THE STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST YOU FURNISHED SHOWS NO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. THE NET WORTH STATEMENT AND CREDIT REPORTS WERE CLEAR. NO COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE COMMITTEE. NO WITNESSES HAVE ASKED TO BE PRESENT. WHAT PERCENT OF YOUR PRACTICE IS NOW FAMILY COURT?
A APPROXIMATELY 40 PERCENT.
Q CONCERNING JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT AND "ROBEITIS", WHAT WOULD YOU DO ON THE BENCH IF ELECTED TO INSURE YOU DID NOT DEVELOP A BAD JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT?
A THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS. ONE IS I HAVE PRACTICED LAW AS A SOLE PRACTITIONER FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS, AND IN A FIRM BEFORE THAT, AND HAVE BEEN ACTIVELY TRYING CASES FOR SEVEN YEARS AND I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO STAND BEFORE THE BENCH AS A LITIGANT AND TO BE ON THE RECEIVING END OF JUDGES THAT ARE IN A BAD MOOD, AND I WOULD REMEMBER THAT AND REMEMBER WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE ON THE OTHER SIDE. I THINK THAT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I WOULD DO IS TRY TO REMEMBER THAT AS A JUDGE, EVEN THOUGH SOME CASES AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN A JUDGE FOR AWHILE, THE CASES, IF YOU ARE NOT CAREFUL, CAN BECOME ROUTINE, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT TO THAT LITIGANT, WHILE IT MAY BE ROUTINE TO YOU OR TO THAT COURT, IT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT CASE THAT THEY WILL EVER SEE. IT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT CASE IN THE WORLD TO THEM, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT AND TO AFFORD EVERY LITIGANT AND EVERY LAWYER A FULL AND FAIR HEARING BY A JUDGE WHO IS IMPARTIAL AND COURTEOUS AND TO REMEMBER THEY DESERVE THAT. I THINK THE OTHER THING I WOULD DO IS STRIVE TO KEEP A PROPER BALANCE BETWEEN MY RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND MY WORK LIFE SO IT WOULD REDUCE THE STRESS LEVEL.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR ROUTINE OR YOUR SCHEDULE THAT WOULD PROHIBIT YOU FROM KEEPING THE KIND OF HOURS THAT ON OCCASION YOU HAVE TO KEEP; NAMELY, POSSIBLE SATURDAYS OR LATE FRIDAYS ON OCCASION AND NIGHTS EVEN ON SOME WEEKDAYS?
A NO, SIR. AS A SOLE PRACTITIONER I DO THAT EVERY WEEK.
SENATOR POPE: DOES THE COMMITTEE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. WILLIAMS?
SENATOR LOURIE: NONE.
Q THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU. IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT, BUT I NOTICE THAT YOU ARE SINGLE, AND, OF COURSE, YOU ARE STILL VERY YOUNG, WOULD A MAN WHO APPEARED BEFORE YOU HAVE ANY REASON TO FEEL THAT THEY MIGHT NOT GET PROPER TREATMENT?
A NOT AT ALL. I DON'T THINK THAT MY ABILITY TO ASSIMILATE FACTS AND APPLY THE LAW TO THEM IS AFFECTED BY MY MARITAL STATUS. I HAVE NO PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT OUGHT TO BE.
SENATOR POPE: DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENT STATEMENT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE TO THE COMMITTEE?
A NO, SIR.
SENATOR POPE: IS THAT EVERYTHING FROM THE COMMITTEE? THANKS A LOT. WE WILL GO INTO A BRIEF EXECUTIVE SESSION.
(WHEREUPON, THE TAKING OF THE HEARING WAS CONCLUDED AT 10:35 A.M.)
The Judicial Screening Committee has reviewed and investigated the qualifications of the following candidates and unanimously found them to be qualified to serve:
Stephen S. Bartlett
Ernest Hamilton
Robert N. Jenkins, Sr.
Andrew M. Jones, Jr.
Amy C. Sutherland
Michael F. Talley
Kathryn Williams
Respectfully submitted,
/s/Thomas H. Pope, III, Chairman
/s/Rep. Larry E. Gentry, Vice-Chairman
/s/Senator John A. Martin
/s/Senator Isadore E. Lourie
/s/Senator Glenn F. McConnell
/s/Rep. Daniel E. Martin, Sr.
/s/Rep. B.L. Hendricks, Jr.
/s/Rep. James H. Hodges
On motion of Rep. GENTRY, the Report was ordered printed in the Journal.
The following was received from the Senate.
Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1991
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it insists upon it amendments to S. 999:
S. 999 -- Senators Williams, Waddell, Martin and Drummond: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE THAT WHEN THE RESPECTIVE HOUSES OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADJOURN ON THURSDAY, JUNE 6, 1991, THEY SHALL STAND ADJOURNED TO MEET ON THEIR OWN MOTION IN REGULAR STATEWIDE SESSION, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THOSE ITEMS OF LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS WHICH MAY BE CONSIDERED DURING SUCH STATEWIDE SESSION AFTER JUNE 6, 1991.
and asks for a Committee of Conference and has appointed Senators Williams, McConnell and Lourie of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate.
Very respectfully,
President
No. 132
Whereupon, the Chair appointed Reps. WILKINS, McTEER and HODGES to the Committee of Conference on the part of the House and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1991
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has granted Free Conference Powers on H. 3650:
and asks for a Committee of Conference and has appointed Senators Waddell, Drummond and Setzler of the Committee of Free Conference on the part of the Senate.
Very respectfully,
President
No. 133
Received as information.
The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1991
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has appointed Senators J. Verne Smith, Leatherman and Rose of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate on S. 72:
S. 72 -- Senator Rose: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-7-315, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN INFORMATION PERTAINING TO A COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY OR AN INTERMEDIATE CARE FACILITY FOR THE MENTALLY RETARDED OR A GROUP HOME OPERATED BY A COUNTY MENTAL RETARDATION BOARD OR THE STATE MENTAL RETARDATION DEPARTMENT SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE DEPARTMENT MAY DISCLOSE CERTAIN INFORMATION RELATING TO A NURSING CARE FACILITY AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE IDENTITY OF A COMPLAINANT NOT BE DISCLOSED EXCEPT UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
Very respectfully,
President
No. 380
Received as information.
The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., May 29, 1991
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully informs your Honorable Body that it has appointed Senators Martschink, Passailaigue and Hinds of the Committee of Conference on the part of the Senate on S. 237:
S. 237 -- Senator Martschink: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 5-7-150, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF COASTAL MUNICIPALITIES OVER PIERS AND OTHER STRUCTURES AND WATERS OF THE OCEAN WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE STRAND WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT A COASTAL MUNICIPALITY HAS CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OVER THE WATERS OF THE OCEAN AND INLETS.
Very respectfully,
President
No. 381
Received as information.
Rep. FOSTER, from the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions, submitted a favorable report, on:
S. 918 -- Senators Fielding, Passailaigue, McConnell, Washington, Martschink and Rose: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO NAME THE BRIDGE OVER THE ASHLEY RIVER WHICH IS PART OF THE MARK CLARK EXPRESSWAY IN CHARLESTON AS THE GENERAL WILLIAM C. WESTMORELAND BRIDGE.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.
Rep. FOSTER, from the Committee on Invitations and Memorial Resolutions, submitted a favorable report, on:
S. 1008 -- Senators Lourie, Patterson, Courson and Giese: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO NAME THE INTERCHANGE AT THE SOUTHEASTERN BELTWAY AND FORT JACKSON BOULEVARD IN RICHLAND COUNTY THE "HYMAN RUBIN INTERCHANGE" AND TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO ERECT APPROPRIATE SIGNS AT BOTH ENDS OF THE INTERCHANGE ON WHICH THE NAME IS CLEARLY INDICATED.
Ordered for consideration tomorrow.
The Senate sent to the House the following:
S. 1018 -- Senator Drummond: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE BOYS' TRACK AND FIELD TEAM OF NINETY SIX HIGH SCHOOL, GREENWOOD COUNTY, ON WINNING THE 1991 CLASS AA STATE CHAMPIONSHIP IN TRACK AND FIELD.
The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered returned to the Senate with concurrence.
The Senate sent to the House the following:
S. 1019 -- Senator Drummond: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE MEN'S TENNIS TEAM OF LANDER COLLEGE ON WINNING THE 1991 NAIA MEN'S TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIP AT KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI.
The Concurrent Resolution was agreed to and ordered returned to the Senate with concurrence.
The following Bills were introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate committees:
H. 4033 -- Rep. Hayes: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-71-90, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION IN HOSPICE PROGRAMS, SO AS TO REVISE THE BASIS FOR DISCRIMINATION TO INCLUDE ABILITY OR INABILITY TO PAY AND DIAGNOSIS OF PATIENT AND TO CLARIFY THAT A HOSPICE MAY NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THESE GROUNDS IN ACCEPTING PATIENTS OR IN PROVIDING SERVICES.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary.
H. 4034 -- Rep. McAbee: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-11-354 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE HUNTING OF DEER ACROSS PUBLIC ROADS, STREETS, OR HIGHWAYS IN GAME ZONE 2 AND PROVIDE A PENALTY.
Rep. McABEE asked unanimous consent to have the Bill placed on the Calendar without reference.
Rep. STODDARD objected.
Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs.
H. 4035 -- Rep. Burriss: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 61-13-380, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE UNLAWFUL SALE OF ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS DURING CERTAIN PERIODS INCLUDING STATEWIDE ELECTION DAYS, SO AS TO PERMIT THE SALE ON STATEWIDE ELECTION DAYS OF ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS AND BEVERAGES IN SEALED CONTAINERS OF TWO OUNCES OR LESS WHEN SOLD BY AUTHORIZED RETAIL LICENSEES IN THE MANNER PROVIDED BY LAW.
Referred to Committee on Judiciary.
S. 607 -- Senators Setzler, Martin, Saleeby, Fielding, O'Dell, Matthews, Mitchell, Hinds, Giese, Holland, Land, Waddell, Courson and Hayes: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 37-1-301, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO GENERAL DEFINITIONS IN REGARD TO THE CONSUMER PROTECTION CODE, SO AS TO REVISE CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-202, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL CREDITOR CHARGES, SO AS TO REVISE THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-203, RELATING TO DELINQUENCY CHARGES ON CONSUMER CREDIT SALES, SO AS TO REVISE THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-303, RELATING TO NOTICES TO CO-SIGNERS AND SIMILAR PARTIES ON CONSUMER CREDIT SALES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL NOTICE TO CO-SIGNERS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-305, RELATING TO FILING AND POSTING OF MAXIMUM RATE SCHEDULES IN REGARD TO CONSUMER CREDIT SALES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR RATE SCHEDULES IN REGARD TO VARIABLE RATES AND TO PROVIDE THE DATE BY WHICH CERTAIN CREDITOR FILING FEES ARE DUE; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-306, RELATING TO NOTICE OF ASSUMPTION OF RIGHTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT EVERY CREDITOR ENGAGED IN MAKING CONSUMER LOANS PURSUANT TO SELLER CREDIT CARDS SHALL MAKE AND FILE CERTAIN DISCLOSURES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-104, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF A CONSUMER LOAN, SO AS TO REVISE THIS DEFINITION; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-105, RELATING TO FIRST MORTGAGE REAL ESTATE LOANS, SO AS TO CORRECT AN IMPROPER REFERENCE; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-202, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL LENDER CHARGES, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-203, RELATING TO DELINQUENCY CHARGES ON CERTAIN CONSUMER LOANS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-303, RELATING TO NOTICE TO CO-SIGNERS AND SIMILAR PARTIES ON CERTAIN CONSUMER LOANS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL NOTICE TO CO-SIGNERS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-305, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE FILING AND POSTING OF MAXIMUM RATE SCHEDULES BY CREDITORS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THIS FILING AND POSTING IN REGARD TO VARIABLE RATES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-306, RELATING TO NOTICE OF ASSUMPTION RIGHTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT EVERY CREDITOR MAKING CONSUMER LOANS PURSUANT TO A LENDER CREDIT CARD MUST MAKE AND FILE CERTAIN DISCLOSURES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-510, RELATING TO RESTRICTIONS ON AN INTEREST IN LAND AS SECURITY, SO AS TO EXEMPT CERTAIN OPEN-END CREDIT AGREEMENTS FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 37-4-203, RELATING TO FILING AND APPROVAL OF CREDIT INSURANCE PREMIUM RATES AND CHARGES, SO AS TO REVISE CERTAIN CREDIT LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUMS WHICH MAY BE CHARGED; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-108, RELATING TO ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT ORDERS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE VIOLATIONS WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO ACTIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATOR AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR TO IMPOSE CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-113, RELATING TO CIVIL ACTIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH A CIVIL PENALTY MAY BE IMPOSED; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-117, RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES REGARDING CONSUMER PROTECTION OF THE ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-203, RELATING TO FEES TO BE PAID TO THE ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE FEE DUE BY PERSONS ALSO ENGAGED IN MAKING CONSUMER RENTAL-PURCHASE AGREEMENTS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-10-102, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ATTORNEY'S FEES AND OTHER CHARGES ON MORTGAGE LOANS FOR PERSONAL PURPOSES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN CREDITOR DISCLOSURE STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 37-10-107 SO AS TO PROHIBIT A PERSON FROM MAINTAINING AN ACTION FOR RELIEF REGARDING THE BORROWING OF MONEY UNDER CERTAIN SPECIFIED CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 39-61-100, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE ADMINISTRATOR UNDER THE MOTOR CLUB SERVICES ACT, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR TO IMPOSE PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-150, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE ADMINISTRATOR IN REGARD TO PAWNBROKERS, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR TO ISSUE CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS; TO AMEND SECTION 44-79-80, RELATING TO THE FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR IN REGARD TO THE PHYSICAL FITNESS SERVICES ACT, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE POWERS AND INCREASE THE FEES FOR CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORITY ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 37-6-114 RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION AGAINST JURY TRIALS IN ACTIONS BROUGHT BY THE ADMINISTRATOR UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION CODE.
Rep. L. MARTIN asked unanimous consent to have the Bill placed on the Calendar without reference.
Rep. KLAPMAN objected.
Referred to Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.
S. 1014 -- Senators Passailaigue, Fielding, McConnell, Washington and Martschink: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 50-21-135 SO AS TO ESTABLISH A NO WAKE ZONE ON THE ASHLEY RIVER WITHIN ONE HUNDRED YARDS OF THE DOLPHIN COVE MARINA IN CHARLESTON COUNTY.
Rule 5.12 was waived by unanimous consent.
On motion of Rep. HOLT, with unanimous consent, the Bill was ordered placed on the Calendar without reference.
The roll call of the House of Representatives was taken resulting as follows.
Alexander, M.O. Alexander, T.C. Altman Bailey, G. Bailey, J. Baker Barber Beasley Beatty Bennett Boan Brown, G. Brown, H. Brown, J. Burriss Cato Chamblee Clyborne Cole Cooper Corbett Cork Corning Cromer Elliott, D. Elliott, L. Fair Farr Foster Glover Gonzales Gregory Harris, J. Harris, P. Harrison Harwell Haskins Hayes Hendricks Hodges Holt Houck Inabinett Jaskwhich Jennings Johnson, J.C. Johnson, J.W. Keegan Keesley Kempe Keyserling Kinon Kirsh Klapman Littlejohn Manly Marchbanks Martin, D. Martin, L. Martin, M. Mattos McAbee McCain McCraw McElveen McGinnis McKay McLeod McTeer Meacham Neilson Nettles Phillips Rama Rhoad Rogers Ross Rudnick Scott Sharpe Sheheen Short Smith Snow Stoddard Tucker Vaughn Waites Waldrop Wells Whipper White Wilder Wilkins Williams, D. Wofford Wright Young, A. Young, R.
I came in after the roll call and was present for the Session on Thursday, May 30.
Ronald Fulmer Harry Hallman C. Lenoir Sturkie Larry Gentry Bob Shirley Marion P. Carnell Thomas E. Huff Rick Quinn John G. Felder Steve Lanford Paul M. Burch Alex Harvin, III
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
The SPEAKER granted Rep. BAXLEY a leave of absence for the day.
Rep. KOON signed a statement with the Clerk that he came in after the roll call of the House and was present for the Session on Wednesday, May 29.
I was not present during the Session but arrived in time to attend the Committee meetings on Wednesday, May 22.
Rep. GEORGE H. BAILEY
Announcement was made that Dr. O'Neill Barrett, Jr. of Columbia is the Doctor of the Day for the General Assembly.
The following Bill was taken up.
H. 3892 -- Rep. Gonzales: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 340 OF 1967, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CHARLESTON SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ANNUAL TAX MILLAGE FOR THE DISTRICT IS DETERMINED, SO AS TO REVISE THIS PROCEDURE INCLUDING PROVISIONS AUTHORIZING A REFERENDUM FOR INCREASING THE MILLAGE CAP AND AUTHORIZING CHARLESTON COUNTY COUNCIL TO APPROVE A CHANGE IN THE ANNUAL MILLAGE CAP.
Reps. GONZALES and R. YOUNG proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\BR1\1740.AC), which was adopted.
Amend the bill, as and if amended, Section 10 of Act 340 of 1967, as contained in SECTION 1, by adding before the period on line 12, page 2 of the bill /from time to time/. When amended line 12 shall read: /council may determine from time to time. Should the council reject/.
Amend further, Section 10 of Act 340 of 1967, as contained in SECTION 1, by adding before the last sentence: /No public funds may be expended on the costs of the referendum except for those necessary to place the referendum on the ballot, conduct the election, and provide factual information relating to the referendum question. In no event may public funds be used for publication or distribution of advertising to influence the outcome of the referendum./
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend totals and title to conform.
The Bill, as amended, was read the second time and ordered to third reading.
On motion of Rep. GONZALES, with unanimous consent, it was ordered that H. 3892 be read the third time tomorrow.
Rep. McCAIN moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill until Tuesday, June 4, which was adopted.
H. 4030 -- Rep. McCain: A BILL TO PROVIDE THAT ELECTIONS FOR SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARDS OF TRUSTEES IN ORANGEBURG COUNTY MUST BE HELD AT THE TIME OF THE GENERAL ELECTION.
The following Bills and Joint Resolution were taken up, read the second time, and ordered to a third reading:
S. 1009 -- Senators Williams and Matthews: A BILL TO ABOLISH THE ORANGEBURG COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION AND TO DEVOLVE UPON THE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS ALL POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE COUNTY BOARD EXCEPT FOR THE ELECTION OF TRUSTEES WHICH BECOMES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COUNTY ELECTION COMMISSION AND FOOD SERVICE SUPERVISION AND ATTENDANCE SUPERVISORS WHICH BECOME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A CONSORTIUM FORMED BY THE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
H. 4017 -- Rep. Keegan: A BILL TO AUTHORIZE THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO RESTORE THE CHARTER OF SEABANKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., IN HORRY COUNTY.
H. 3668 -- Rep. Lanford: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO REAUTHORIZE THE SOUTH CAROLINA CEMETERY BOARD FOR FIVE YEARS.
On motion of Rep. McCAIN, with unanimous consent, it was ordered that S. 1009 be read the third time tomorrow.
On motion of Rep. KEEGAN, with unanimous consent, it was ordered that H. 4017 be read the third time tomorrow.
The following Bill was taken up, read the third time, and ordered sent to the Senate.
H. 3539 -- Rep. Corning: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 466 OF 1988, RELATING TO THE LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE ACT, APPROVAL OF REGULATIONS, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE POLICY AND GROUP POLICY, AND ADVERTISING RESTRICTIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT NO INSURER IS REQUIRED TO OFFER NECESSARY CARE IN THE HOME OR COMMUNITY WITH DAILY BENEFITS AT THE SAME LEVEL THAT WOULD BE PAID FOR CARE IN A NURSING HOME OR COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, REQUIRE THE INSURER TO OFFER THIS NECESSARY CARE IN THE HOME OR COMMUNITY FOR THE INSURED'S OPTION BY MEANS OF A RIDER, AND PROVIDE AN EXCEPTION FOR OFFERING THE RIDER; AND TO PROVIDE THAT THREE YEARS FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT, AND TWO YEARS AFTER THAT, THE COMMISSION ON AGING, IN COOPERATION WITH THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON AGING AND THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, SHALL EVALUATE THE EFFECTS OF THIS ACT AND REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
The following Bill was taken up, read the third time, and ordered returned to the Senate with amendments.
S. 722 -- Senators Lourie, Land, Saleeby and Passailaigue: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-59-15, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THOSE CONTRACTORS INCLUDED AS RESIDENTIAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS FOR PURPOSES OF REGULATION BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA RESIDENTIAL BUILDERS COMMISSION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT PEST CONTROLLERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED RESIDENTIAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS.
The following Bill was taken up.
H. 3547 -- Rep. Koon: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 4-27-185 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT UPON RECORDATION, FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAN ROADWAYS SUPERSEDE ROADS THAT WERE ON A PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PLAT OR DEED.
Rep. T.C. ALEXANDER moved to recommit the Bill to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry, which was agreed to.
The following Bill was taken up.
H. 3563 -- Reps. Sharpe, H. Brown, Townsend, Sturkie, Snow, Altman, Smith, Bennett, Shirley, McAbee, P. Harris, Carnell, Klapman, Burriss, Waites, Koon, Tucker and J.C. Johnson: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-59-15, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS WHO MUST BE REGISTERED BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA RESIDENTIAL BUILDERS COMMISSION, SO AS TO DELETE PEST CONTROLLERS FROM THE LIST OF PERSONS WHO ARE CONSIDERED RESIDENTIAL SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS.
Rep. G. BAILEY moved to table the Bill, which was agreed to.
The following Bill was taken up.
S. 703 -- Senators Lourie, Matthews and Hayes: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 47 TO TITLE 27 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA MANUFACTURED HOME PARK TENANCY ACT BY SETTING FORTH PURPOSES, SCOPE, JURISDICTION, DEFINITIONS, INTERPRETATION OF PRINCIPLES, NOTICE, RENTAL AGREEMENTS, OBLIGATIONS OF OWNERS AND RESIDENTS, GROUNDS FOR EVICTION, AND NOTIFICATION OF SALE OF PARK, CHANGE IN LAND USE, AND REZONING.
Rep. G. BAILEY explained the Bill and moved to adjourn debate until Tuesday, June 4, which was adopted.
The following Bill was taken up.
S. 791 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND SECTIONS 24-21-60, 24-21-70, AND 24-21-210, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PROBATION, PAROLE, AND PARDON SERVICES, SO AS TO GRANT THE DUTIES PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO THE COMMISSIONER; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-220, RELATING TO THE POWERS OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SO AS TO GRANT THE DUTIES PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO THE COMMISSIONER AND FURTHER GRANT THE COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES REGARDING MEETINGS; TO AMEND CHAPTER 21, TITLE 24, BY ADDING SECTION 24-21-221, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE COMMISSIONER MUST GIVE A THIRTY-DAY NOTICE TO CERTAIN PERSONS PRIOR TO CONSIDERING A PRISONER FOR PAROLE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 24-21-230, 24-21-240, 24-21-250, 24-21-260, 24-21-270, 24-21-280, 24-21-290, 24-21-420, 24-21-430, RELATING TO PROBATION OFFICERS, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCES TO "OFFICERS" TO "AGENTS" AND REFERENCES TO "EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR" TO "COMMISSIONER"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-440, RELATING TO TIME PERIODS OF PROBATION, SO AS TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE COURT MUST ENTER A DISCHARGE ORDER UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROBATION PERIOD; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-450, RELATING TO REVOCATION OF PAROLE, SO AS TO CHANGE REFERENCES TO "OFFICER" TO "AGENT"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-480, RELATING TO RESTITUTION CENTERS, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD TO PLACE A PRISONER IN A RESTITUTION CENTER AS A CONDITION OF PAROLE; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-620, RELATING TO PAROLE BOARD REVIEWS, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCE TO THE "COMMISSIONER OF PAROLES AND PARDONS" TO "COMMISSIONER"; TO AMEND SECTIONS 24-21-645 AND 24-21-650, RELATING TO THE BOARD, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCES TO "EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR" TO "COMMISSIONER"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-660, RELATING TO A PAROLED PRISONER'S CUSTODY, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT THE PRISONER REMAIN IN THE BOARD'S "JURISDICTION" RATHER THAN IN THE BOARD'S "LEGAL CUSTODY"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-680, RELATING TO REVOCATION OF PAROLE, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE PAROLE AGENT TO ISSUE A CITATION UPON THE VIOLATION OF PAROLE AND TO GRANT THE BOARD THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A FINAL DETERMINATION AS TO REVOCATION RATHER THAN CANCELING THE ORDER OF PAROLE AND GIVING THE PRISONER THE STATUS OF AN ESCAPED CONVICT; TO AMEND 24-21-930, RELATING TO PAROLE ORDERS, SO AS TO CHANGE REFERENCES TO "EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS" TO "COMMISSIONERS"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-990, RELATING TO THE EFFECTS OF A PARDON, SO AS TO ALLOW A PARDONED PRISONER TO HOLD PUBLIC OFFICE EXCEPT AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 16-13-210 AND TO PROVIDE THAT A PARDON DOES NOT EXPUNGE A RECORD OF CONVICTION; TO AMEND SECTION 24-23-130, RELATING TO THE SUPERVISION OF A PROBATIONER, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCES TO "OFFICER" TO "AGENT"; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 24-21-14, RELATING TO THE COMMISSIONER OF PAROLES AND PARDONS.
Rep. VAUGHN explained the Bill.
Reps. WHIPPER, HOLT, GLOVER and D. MARTIN objected to the Bill.
Rep. VAUGHN moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Tuesday, June 4, which was adopted.
The following Bill was taken up.
S. 883 -- Senators J. Verne Smith, Shealy, Leatherman, Giese, Waddell, Drummond, Moore, Bryan, Lourie, Long, Peeler, Mitchell, Hinds and Mullinax: A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 24 OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 22 RELATING TO THE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND ADULT CRIMINAL OFFENDER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SO AS TO ESTABLISH AN OFFENDER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM TO ALLEVIATE PRISON OVERCROWDING BY PROVIDING FOR THE IDENTIFICATION, PREPARATION, AND PLACEMENT OF APPROPRIATE NON-VIOLENT OFFENDERS IN THE COMMUNITY; AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 24-3-1110 THROUGH 24-3-2060, THE PRISON OVERCROWDING POWERS ACT.
Rep. ROGERS moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Tuesday, June 4.
Rep. VAUGHN moved to table the motion, which was rejected by a division vote of 35 to 38.
The question then recurred to the motion to adjourn debate, which was agreed to by a division vote of 43 to 32.
The following Bill was taken up.
H. 3687 -- Reps. Fair, Wright, Corbett, Keegan and R. Young: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 59-29-240 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF NEW AGE RELIGIOUS AND OCCULT PHILOSOPHIES AND METHODS OF INSTRUCTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES.
Rep. FAIR moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until January 14, 1992, which was adopted by a division vote of 56 to 2.
The following Bill was taken up.
S. 903 -- Judiciary Committee: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 22-3-545 SO AS TO PROVIDE A PROCEDURE FOR THE TRANSFER OF CERTAIN CASES FROM GENERAL SESSIONS COURT TO MAGISTRATE'S COURT UPON PETITION OF THE SOLICITOR IN THAT CIRCUIT TO THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE CRIMINAL COURT JUDGE, REQUIRE A TIME LIMIT ON THE REMOVAL OF THE CASE FROM THE DOCKET OF THE GENERAL SESSIONS COURT, REQUIRE THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE TO PROSECUTE ALL TRANSFERRED CASES, AND REQUIRE ALL TRANSFERRED CASES TO BE RECORDED ON TAPE AND MAINTAINED BY THE CLERK OF COURT.
Rep. Harwell proposes the following Amendment No. 2 (Doc. Name L:\Council\Legis\Amend\436\11788.DW).
Amend the bill, as and if amended, Section 22-3-545, by adding an appropriately lettered subsection to read:
/( ) The provisions of this section apply only to those magistrates and municipal courts located in counties whose population is more than one hundred fifty thousand according to the latest official United States Census./
Amend title to conform.
Rep. WILKINS explained the amendment.
Rep. COLE moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Wednesday, June 5.
Rep. ROGERS moved to table the motion, which was agreed to by a division vote of 41 to 27.
Reps. CORBETT, GREGORY, COLE, BEATTY, McCAIN, HASKINS, RAMA, LITTLEJOHN, LANFORD, ROSS, HODGES, KOON, HARRISON, McGINNIS and WELLS objected to the Bill.
The following Bill was taken up.
S. 283 -- Senator Hinds: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 6-7-730, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PROCEDURE FOR ENACTING OR AMENDING ZONING REGULATIONS OR MAPS, SO AS TO MAKE ZONING ORDINANCES SUBJECT TO THE PROCEDURES, TO PROVIDE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS FORTY-FIVE RATHER THAN THIRTY DAYS TO SUBMIT ITS REPORT TO THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY AND FAILURE TO SUBMIT ITS REPORT WITHIN FORTY-FIVE DAYS IS DEEMED APPROVAL OF THE CHANGES, AND TO PROVIDE THAT NO SUIT MAY BE BROUGHT TO CHALLENGE THE VALIDITY OF A ZONING ORDINANCE, RESOLUTION, OR MAP, OR AMENDMENTS TO ANY OF THEM EXCEPT ON THE GROUNDS OF ADEQUACY OF NOTICE UNLESS THE CONTESTANT FILES A NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONTEST WITH THE GOVERNING BODY WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AFTER ITS FINAL ACTION ON THE MATTER AND ACTUALLY COMMENCES THE ACTION WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF FILING THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONTEST.
Rep. McLEOD moved to commit the Bill to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry, which was agreed to.
Rep. KEESLEY moved to adjourn debate upon the Joint Resolution until Tuesday, June 4, which was adopted.
S. 1006 -- Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee: A JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE REGULATIONS OF CLEMSON UNIVERSITY LIVESTOCK-POULTRY HEALTH DIVISION, RELATING TO EQUINE SALES FACILITY PERMITS, DESIGNATED AS REGULATION DOCUMENT NUMBER 1397, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 23, TITLE 1 OF THE 1976 CODE.
Rep. KLAPMAN moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill until Tuesday, June 4, which was adopted.
S. 371 -- Senator Setzler: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 29-5-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO MECHANICS LIENS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF ANY LIENS FILED BY A SUB-SUBCONTRACTOR OR SUPPLIER AGAINST A SUBCONTRACTOR TO WHOM THE SUB-SUBCONTRACTOR OR SUPPLIER HAS SUPPLIED LABOR, MATERIAL, OR SERVICES SHALL NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT DUE BY THE CONTRACTOR TO THAT SUBCONTRACTOR; AND TO AMEND SECTION 29-5-60, RELATING TO MECHANICS LIENS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR A PRORATED PAYMENT TO LIENORS IN THE EVENT THE AMOUNT DUE A SUBCONTRACTOR BY THE CONTRACTOR IS INSUFFICIENT TO PAY ALL LIENORS.
The following Bill was taken up.
S. 189 -- Senator Giese: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 23-35-10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE SALE, STORAGE, TRANSPORTATION, OR USE OF IMPERMISSIBLE FIREWORKS AND THE ENUMERATION OF PERMISSIBLE FIREWORKS, SO AS TO ELIMINATE BOTTLE TYPE ROCKETS FROM THE LIST OF THE PERMISSIBLE FIREWORKS IN SOUTH CAROLINA, AND TO ALLOW BOTTLE TYPE ROCKETS WHOSE TOTAL PYROTECHNIC COMPOSITION DOES NOT EXCEED TWENTY GRAMS EACH IN WEIGHT TO BE STORED WITHIN THIS STATE FOR SALE OUTSIDE THE STATE UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 1992.
Reps. G. BROWN, McLEOD, M. MARTIN and COOPER objected to the Bill.
Reps. McTEER and KLAPMAN withdrew their objections to H. 3345 however, other objections remained upon the Bill.
On motion of Rep. M.O. ALEXANDER, with unanimous consent, it was ordered that H. 3668 be read the third time tomorrow.
On motion of Rep. L. MARTIN, with unanimous consent, the following Bill was ordered recalled from the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry.
S. 607 -- Senators Setzler, Martin, Saleeby, Fielding, O'Dell, Matthews, Mitchell, Hinds, Giese, Holland, Land, Waddell, Courson and Hayes: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 37-1-301, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO GENERAL DEFINITIONS IN REGARD TO THE CONSUMER PROTECTION CODE, SO AS TO REVISE CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-202, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL CREDITOR CHARGES, SO AS TO REVISE THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-203, RELATING TO DELINQUENCY CHARGES ON CONSUMER CREDIT SALES, SO AS TO REVISE THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-303, RELATING TO NOTICES TO CO-SIGNERS AND SIMILAR PARTIES ON CONSUMER CREDIT SALES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL NOTICE TO CO-SIGNERS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-305, RELATING TO FILING AND POSTING OF MAXIMUM RATE SCHEDULES IN REGARD TO CONSUMER CREDIT SALES, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR RATE SCHEDULES IN REGARD TO VARIABLE RATES AND TO PROVIDE THE DATE BY WHICH CERTAIN CREDITOR FILING FEES ARE DUE; TO AMEND SECTION 37-2-306, RELATING TO NOTICE OF ASSUMPTION OF RIGHTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT EVERY CREDITOR ENGAGED IN MAKING CONSUMER LOANS PURSUANT TO SELLER CREDIT CARDS SHALL MAKE AND FILE CERTAIN DISCLOSURES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-104, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF A CONSUMER LOAN, SO AS TO REVISE THIS DEFINITION; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-105, RELATING TO FIRST MORTGAGE REAL ESTATE LOANS, SO AS TO CORRECT AN IMPROPER REFERENCE; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-202, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ADDITIONAL LENDER CHARGES, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-203, RELATING TO DELINQUENCY CHARGES ON CERTAIN CONSUMER LOANS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE CHARGES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-303, RELATING TO NOTICE TO CO-SIGNERS AND SIMILAR PARTIES ON CERTAIN CONSUMER LOANS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL NOTICE TO CO-SIGNERS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-305, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE FILING AND POSTING OF MAXIMUM RATE SCHEDULES BY CREDITORS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THIS FILING AND POSTING IN REGARD TO VARIABLE RATES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-306, RELATING TO NOTICE OF ASSUMPTION RIGHTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT EVERY CREDITOR MAKING CONSUMER LOANS PURSUANT TO A LENDER CREDIT CARD MUST MAKE AND FILE CERTAIN DISCLOSURES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-510, RELATING TO RESTRICTIONS ON AN INTEREST IN LAND AS SECURITY, SO AS TO EXEMPT CERTAIN OPEN-END CREDIT AGREEMENTS FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION; TO AMEND SECTION 37-4-203, RELATING TO FILING AND APPROVAL OF CREDIT INSURANCE PREMIUM RATES AND CHARGES, SO AS TO REVISE CERTAIN CREDIT LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUMS WHICH MAY BE CHARGED; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-108, RELATING TO ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT ORDERS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE VIOLATIONS WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO ACTIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATOR AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR TO IMPOSE CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-113, RELATING TO CIVIL ACTIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH A CIVIL PENALTY MAY BE IMPOSED; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-117, RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES REGARDING CONSUMER PROTECTION OF THE ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-203, RELATING TO FEES TO BE PAID TO THE ADMINISTRATOR, SO AS TO CLARIFY THE FEE DUE BY PERSONS ALSO ENGAGED IN MAKING CONSUMER RENTAL-PURCHASE AGREEMENTS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-10-102, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ATTORNEY'S FEES AND OTHER CHARGES ON MORTGAGE LOANS FOR PERSONAL PURPOSES, SO AS TO DELETE CERTAIN CREDITOR DISCLOSURE STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS; TO AMEND THE 1976 CODE BY ADDING SECTION 37-10-107 SO AS TO PROHIBIT A PERSON FROM MAINTAINING AN ACTION FOR RELIEF REGARDING THE BORROWING OF MONEY UNDER CERTAIN SPECIFIED CONDITIONS; TO AMEND SECTION 39-61-100, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE ADMINISTRATOR UNDER THE MOTOR CLUB SERVICES ACT, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR TO IMPOSE PENALTIES; TO AMEND SECTION 40-39-150, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE ADMINISTRATOR IN REGARD TO PAWNBROKERS, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE ADMINISTRATOR TO ISSUE CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS; TO AMEND SECTION 44-79-80, RELATING TO THE FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR IN REGARD TO THE PHYSICAL FITNESS SERVICES ACT, SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THESE POWERS AND INCREASE THE FEES FOR CERTIFICATES OF AUTHORITY ISSUED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 37-6-114 RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION AGAINST JURY TRIALS IN ACTIONS BROUGHT BY THE ADMINISTRATOR UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION CODE.
On motion of Rep. KIRSH, with unanimous consent, the following Bill was ordered recalled from the Committee on Ways and Means.
S. 663 -- Senator Land: A BILL TO REPEAL SECTION 12-54-250, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA TAX COMMISSION TO REQUIRE TAX PAYMENTS OF TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS OR MORE TO BE MADE BY ANY MEANS ESTABLISHED BY THE COMMISSION, WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE STATE TREASURER, THAT MAKES THE FUNDS IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE TO THE STATE.
On motion of Rep. PHILLIPS, with unanimous consent, the following Bill was ordered recalled from the Committee on Education and Public Works.
S. 295 -- Senators Setzler and Stilwell: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 59-63-31 SO AS TO FURTHER PROVIDE FOR THE QUALIFICATIONS OF CHILDREN TO ATTEND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF ANY SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND SECTION 59-63-32 SO AS TO PERMIT A SCHOOL DISTRICT TO IMPOSE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS ON ADULTS SEEKING TO ENROLL A CHILD IN A SCHOOL OF THAT DISTRICT.
Rep. SCOTT asked unanimous consent to recall H. 3749 from the Committee on Judiciary.
Rep. BURRISS objected.
The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.
H. 3319 -- Reps. Boan and McElveen: A BILL TO AMEND ACT 127 OF 1989, RELATING TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA HEALTH INSURANCE POOL, SO AS TO DESIGNATE A PORTION OF THAT ACT AS SECTION 38-74-70, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, AND TO INCLUDE IMMUNITY FOR AN ACT OR OMISSION IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THE POWERS AND DUTIES UNDER THE HEALTH INSURANCE POOL ACT.
Rep. T.C. ALEXANDER explained the Senate amendment.
The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.
The Senate amendments to the following Bill were taken up for consideration.
H. 3714 -- Rep. Hodges: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 20-7-1440, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO FEES, COSTS, AND ALLOWANCES ALLOWED IN DELINQUENCY, DEPENDENCY, AND NEGLECT ACTIONS IN FAMILY COURT, SO AS TO ALLOW FOR A FEE FOR THE SERVICE OF PROCESS IN CONNECTION WITH A TITLE VI-D CHILD SUPPORT ACTION PURSUANT TO A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY THE SHERIFF OR CLERK OF COURT AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF FEDERAL MATCHING FUNDS.
Rep. HODGES explained the Senate amendment.
The Senate amendments were agreed to, and the Bill, having received three readings in both Houses, it was ordered that the title be changed to that of an Act, and that it be enrolled for ratification.
The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up.
S. 957 -- Senators Shealy, Moore, Setzler and Wilson: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING CONGRESS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY TO SELECT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE IN AIKEN COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA, AS THE SITE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE PROPOSED PRODUCTION REACTOR.
Whereas, the Savannah River Site has been an integral part of South Carolina's economy for more than four decades, having a direct impact on the employment of thousands of South Carolinians throughout a fourteen-county region of this State and thousands of others in several counties of northern Georgia who work daily at the site and in hundreds of support industries; and
Whereas, the positive economic impact in the creation of thousands of new jobs notwithstanding, the potential unemployment of as many as sixty thousand South Carolinians and Georgians who work at the site and in support industries would result from location of this project at a site other than Aiken County, South Carolina; and
Whereas, the infrastructure currently exists to support construction and operation of such a facility in Aiken County and to support research and development programs through South Carolina's internationally recognized university systems. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring:
That the members of the General Assembly of South Carolina, hereby memorialize Congress, the President of the United States and the United States Department of Energy to select the Savannah River Site in Aiken County, South Carolina, as the site for the construction and operation of the proposed production reactor where research and development activities conducted there will be of benefit to all Americans.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the President of the United States, the United States Senate and House of Representatives, the Secretary of the Department of Energy, and to each member of the South Carolina Congressional Delegation.
Reps. KEYSERLING, WAITES, ROGERS, KEMPE, and MANLY proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\CYY\18659.SD), which was tabled.
Amend the resolution, as and if amended, by adding the following new paragraph immediately following line 9 of page 2:
/Be it further resolved that the General Assembly's support for the construction and operation of the proposed production reactor at the Savannah River Site is contingent upon the existence of a federal disposal facility for high-level radioactive waste./
Amend title to conform.
Rep. KEYSERLING explained the amendment.
Rep. WILDER spoke against the amendment.
Rep. CORK spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. HUFF spoke against the amendment.
Rep. MANLY spoke in favor of the amendment.
Rep. RHOAD spoke against the amendment.
Rep. HUFF moved to table the amendment.
Rep. KEYSERLING demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander, T.C. Altman Bailey, G. Baker Beasley Bennett Brown, G. Brown, H. Burriss Carnell Cato Chamblee Clyborne Cooper Elliott, D. Elliott, L. Fair Felder Gentry Gonzales Harris, J. Harrison Harvin Haskins Hendricks Holt Huff Jaskwhich Jennings Keegan Keesley Klapman Koon Lanford Littlejohn Marchbanks Martin, L. McAbee McCain McCraw McKay Quinn Rama Rhoad Ross Rudnick Sharpe Shirley Smith Snow Stoddard Tucker Vaughn Waldrop Wells Wilder Wofford Wright Young, A.
Those who voted in the negative are:
Bailey, J. Barber Beatty Brown, J. Corbett Cork Cromer Farr Foster Glover Harwell Hayes Inabinett Kempe Keyserling Kinon Kirsh Manly Martin, D. McElveen McGinnis McLeod Meacham Neilson Phillips Rogers Scott Sheheen Sturkie Waites Whipper White
So, the amendment was tabled.
On motion of Rep. KEYSERLING, with unanimous consent, her remarks were ordered printed in the journal as follows:
You have all received a letter from the State Development Board in support of the new production reactor at the Savannah River Site. You have also received a packet of information from the Energy Research Foundation which raises important questions about that letter and this Resolution. As a longtime SRP watcher, I think we should discuss these questions before we vote.
Over the years I've introduced many Resolutions related to safety, and radioactive waste, at the Savannah River Plant, but I have never questioned its existence--and do not now. But I have questioned its procedures.
For many years the Savannah River Plant--now the Savannah River Site--was run like a kingdom--overseeing itself, answering to no one in South Carolina, and exempt from the safety regulations which all commercial nuclear plants must follow. That concerned me.
I was also concerned about the increasing quantities of high-level radioactive waste--now about 35 million gallons--sitting in tanks which occasionally leaked into the groundwater. When the Savannah River Plant was built the Department of Energy promised us that the waste would be there only ten years -- that was 35 years ago and it is still there.
This should be a lesson for us to carefully examine promises made by the Department of Energy and its supporters before we rush to wholeheartedly endorse another reactor.
For instance --
This Resolution states that we will lose 60,000 jobs if the new reactor is not built in South Carolina. Where does that number come from?
The State newspaper says 27,000 jobs are at stake.
A Department of Energy economic impact statement cites a maximum of 6,000 jobs for construction and about 1,000 to 2,000 employees to operate the reactor. Which figures are right?
Another economic report suggests we weigh the benefits against the future costs of possible pollution, clean up and a lack of economic diversification in the Aiken area. It shows that, while many new industries are coming to South Carolina, hardly any are coming to the Aiken area. In 1986, there were 85 new and expanded industries in South Carolina--but only one in Aiken.
Is it wise State policy to put all our eggs in one basket--especially a nuclear weapons basket at a time when we are reducing nuclear weapons? Or should we recognize the importance of economic diversification?
The Resolution states that the infrastructure already exists to support construction and operation of such a facility. But a report by Arthur Young, commissioned by Aiken County in 1989, says new infrastructure--schools, housing, water and sewer, and so on will be needed, and will cost Aiken $96 million. But Aiken's additional tax revenues will only be $43 million. Who will pay the $53 million difference? The people of Aiken? The people of South Carolina? Is this cost worth the benefits? Are these figures correct?
Last week, there was an editorial in the State newspaper called Talking Toxic Turkey, which described our state's impotence in controlling hazardous wastes, because of Federal Courts and a do-nothing Environmental Protection Agency.
The editorial reminds us--as if we need reminding--that South Carolina is the dumping ground for garbage of all kinds and goes on to say "This State brought some of this grief on itself by courting the waste industry in the 60's and 70's when the economic philosophy was full speed ahead--without concern for all the environmental risks."
Could this be what we are doing today? Twenty years from now will our children by asking why did our leaders make such decisions?
Why aren't we saying what other states are saying--that we will take the rector only after environmental problems are addressed, that the health and safety of our citizens is more important than jobs. I, for one, am ashamed that South Carolina sets no conditions, as compared to the other states being considered in the selection process.
Gov. Zell Miller of Georgia, from which 23% of the Savannah River Site workforce comes, opposes the new reactor until radioactive emissions at existing reactors are reduced and the contaminated waste is cleaned up.
He stated that Georgians have always been willing to pay a price for our national defense, but that price can never be poisoning the air and water that we pass down to our children. Why aren't we saying this?
Governor Andrus of Idaho, another candidate state for the new reactor, says IF it can be determined that the project will not damage the environment of endanger the citizens, he will support it -- BUT he would insist that waste management concerns be resolved before construction of a facility.
He says the Department of Energy Environmental Impact Statement assumes the existence of a federal disposal facility for high-level radioactive wastes but, so far, there is no site, and won't be for many years, for all the proposed sites are riddled with problems. As the State with one-third of the nation's high level wastes, why aren't we expressing these concerns?
What about Colorado? The Department of Energy says they are moving out of Colorado because the political delegation and the population does not want the plant there.
Do the people in South Carolina want a new reactor before the waste problems are solved? Not the people I talk to.
While other states are saying let's go slowly and set some limits, why are we in South Carolina selling our future for short-term economic gains?
Am I exaggerating the risks? Let's look at the record.
Two years ago, Secretary of Energy Watson promised to clear up the problems at nuclear defense plants, correct the safety problems, clean up the waste and polluted areas, strengthen the regulations and provide independent oversight. And we were all rooting for him.
But, despite his commitment and energetic forays, the problems persist.
Look at these headlines---
This Resolution has long-term social, economic and environmental impact on our entire state. Let us at least pass this amendment which addresses just one of the problems--the ever-increasing pools of high-level radioactive wastes. Let us say we will not have another waste producing reactor until there is somewhere to send these wastes.
I did not vote on the last amendment because a close relative of mine is in a management position at the Savannah River Plant.
Rep. M.O. ALEXANDER
Reps. KEYSERLING, WAITES, CORK, ROGERS, MANLY and J. BAILEY proposed the following Amendment No. 2 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\CYY\18664.SD), which was tabled.
Amend the resolution, as and if amended, by adding the following new paragraph immediately before the last paragraph of the resolution to read:
/Be it further resolved that the General Assembly's support for the construction and operation of the proposed production reactor at the Savannah River Site is contingent upon and subject to the approval of the construction and operation of this reactor at the Savannah River Site by the qualified electors of this State in a statewide advisory referendum called for this purpose by the General Assembly at a date and time to be set by the General Assembly./
Amend title to conform.
Rep. KEYSERLING explained the amendment.
Rep. HUFF moved to table the amendment.
Rep. CORK demanded the yeas and nays, which were taken resulting as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Alexander, T.C. Bailey, G. Baker Beasley Bennett Brown, G. Brown, H. Burriss Carnell Cato Chamblee Cooper Corning Elliott, L. Fair Felder Gentry Gonzales Harris, J. Harrison Haskins Hendricks Holt Huff Jaskwhich Jennings Keegan Keesley Klapman Koon Lanford Littlejohn Marchbanks Martin, L. McAbee McCain McCraw McKay Nettles Quinn Rama Rhoad Ross Rudnick Sharpe Shirley Smith Snow Tucker Vaughn Waldrop Wells Wilder Wofford Wright Young, A.
Those who voted in the negative are:
Altman Bailey, J. Barber Beatty Brown, J. Clyborne Corbett Cork Cromer Farr Foster Glover Harvin Harwell Hayes Inabinett Kempe Keyserling Kinon Kirsh Manly Martin, D. Mattos McElveen McGinnis McLeod Meacham Neilson Phillips Rogers Scott Sheheen Waites Whipper
So, the amendment was tabled.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and ordered returned to the Senate.
I do not support this Resolution because the information it contains is misleading in the areas of existing infrastructure and unemployment. According to the impact study commissioned by the Coordinating Council of Economic Development of Aiken County, July 26, 1989, there will be a total of approximately $96.5 million in capitol and O&M costs needed to satisfy NPR-generated demand for infrastructure and services through 1998. Most of the jobs at SRS in the future will be in the areas of environmental restoration and cleanup, and are not dependent on the NPR.
Rep. CANDY WAITES
I voted "no" on a voice vote for Concurrent Resolution S. 957. It is unconscionable to rush into active recruitment of a new nuclear production reactor without further analysis, debate and input from the people of this State. This is an issue which should be determined by voter referendum.
Rep. J.L. MANN CROMER
The following Concurrent Resolution was taken up.
S. 989 -- Senators Lourie, Passailaigue, Washington and McConnell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO MEMORIALIZE CONGRESS TO ENACT SENATE BILLS 942 AND 943 GIVING PRIORITY FOR PLANTING AND MAINTAINING TREES UNDER FEDERAL FORESTRY PROGRAMS TO AREAS THAT HAVE SUFFERED TREE LOSS DUE TO ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTERS.
Whereas, the strength and health of our environment is dependent upon a well-balanced ecosystem; and
Whereas, an integral component of a properly functioning ecosystem is adequately forested land; and
Whereas, the extensive loss of trees through natural disasters or by other means disturbs this balance making the environment more vulnerable to pollution and destruction; and
Whereas, South Carolina suffered the largest forestry disaster in modern American history as a result of Hurricane Hugo; and
Whereas, Hurricane Hugo destroyed more timber than the Mt. St. Helens eruption, the Yellowstone fires of 1988, Hurricane Frederick, and Hurricane Camille combined; and
Whereas, extra measures must be taken to assist in replacing this forestry loss and restoring the necessary balance in our environment; and
Whereas, two bills have been introduced recently in the United States Senate by South Carolina Senator Fritz Hollings giving priority under two federal forestry programs to areas that have suffered tree loss due to environmental disasters; and
Whereas, Senate Bill 942 gives higher priority to these tree damaged areas under a Small Business Administration tree planning program that provides funds to states to purchase trees from small nurseries to plant on public lands; and
Whereas, Senate Bill 943 highlights these areas for aid under the "America the Beautiful" initiative which solicits private contributions and distributes funds to organizations and localities for volunteer efforts to plant and maintain trees; and
Whereas, the passage of these bills substantially would aid South Carolina in restoring our forests from the devastation caused by Hurricane Hugo. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring:
That the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina memorializes Congress to enact Senate Bills 942 and 943 giving priority for planting and maintaining trees under federal forestry programs to areas that have suffered tree loss due to environmental disasters.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the South Carolina Congressional Delegation.
The Concurrent Resolution was adopted and ordered returned to the Senate.
The following was received.
Columbia, S.C., May 30, 1991
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
The Senate respectfully invites your Honorable Body to attend in the Senate Chamber at 11:50 A.M. today for the purpose of Ratifying Acts.
Very respectfully,
President
On motion of Rep. L. MARTIN, the invitation was accepted.
Rep. QUINN moved to recall H. 3666 from the Ways and Means Committee.
As a first substitute Rep. L. MARTIN moved to dispense with the balance of the Motion Period, which was agreed to.
Rep. FARR moved that the House recur to the morning hour, which was agreed to.
Upon the withdrawal of an objection by Rep. BOAN, the following Bill was taken up.
H. 3345 -- Reps. Wilkins, Hayes, Waites, M.O. Alexander, T.C. Alexander, Altman, G. Bailey, J. Bailey, K. Bailey, Baker, Barber, Baxley, Beasley, Beatty, Bennett, H. Brown, J. Brown, Bruce, Burch, Burriss, Carnell, Cato, Chamblee, Cooper, Corbett, Cork, Corning, Cromer, Derrick, D. Elliott, L. Elliott, Faber, Fair, Farr, Felder, Foster, Fulmer, Gentry, Glover, Gonzales, Hallman, J. Harris, P. Harris, Harvin, Harwell, Haskins, Hendricks, Holt, Houck, Huff, Jaskwhich, J.C. Johnson, J.W. Johnson, Keegan, Kempe, Keyserling, Kirsh, Koon, Lanford, Littlejohn, Manly, Marchbanks, D. Martin, L. Martin, M. Martin, McBride, McCraw, McGinnis, McKay, McTeer, Meacham, Neilson, Nettles, Phillips, Quinn, Rama, Rhoad, Rogers, Rudnick, Scott, Sharpe, Sheheen, Shirley, Smith, Snow, Stoddard, Sturkie, Townsend, Tucker, Vaughn, Waldrop, Wells, Whipper, White, Wilder, Wilkes, D. Williams, Wofford, Wright, A. Young, and R. Young: A BILL TO AMEND ARTICLE 15, CHAPTER 7, TITLE 14, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE STATE GRAND JURY SYSTEM, SO AS TO REVISE THE JURISDICTION AND CERTAIN PROCEDURES OF THE SYSTEM.
Rep. BOAN spoke in favor of the Bill.
The Bill was read the second time and ordered to third reading.
Rep. GONZALES moved to reconsider the vote whereby debate was adjourned on the following Bill, which was agreed to.
S. 703 -- Senators Lourie, Matthews and Hayes: A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 47 TO TITLE 27 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA MANUFACTURED HOME PARK TENANCY ACT BY SETTING FORTH PURPOSES, SCOPE, JURISDICTION, DEFINITIONS, INTERPRETATION OF PRINCIPLES, NOTICE, RENTAL AGREEMENTS, OBLIGATIONS OF OWNERS AND RESIDENTS, GROUNDS FOR EVICTION, AND NOTIFICATION OF SALE OF PARK, CHANGE IN LAND USE, AND REZONING.
Rep. G. BAILEY moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Tuesday, June 4, which was adopted.
Rep. HOLT moved to reconsider the vote whereby debate was adjourned on the following Bill, which was agreed to.
S. 791 -- Senator Drummond: A BILL TO AMEND SECTIONS 24-21-60, 24-21-70, AND 24-21-210, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO PROBATION, PAROLE, AND PARDON SERVICES, SO AS TO GRANT THE DUTIES PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO THE COMMISSIONER; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-220, RELATING TO THE POWERS OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SO AS TO GRANT THE DUTIES PREVIOUSLY GRANTED TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO THE COMMISSIONER AND FURTHER GRANT THE COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES REGARDING MEETINGS; TO AMEND CHAPTER 21, TITLE 24, BY ADDING SECTION 24-21-221, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE COMMISSIONER MUST GIVE A THIRTY-DAY NOTICE TO CERTAIN PERSONS PRIOR TO CONSIDERING A PRISONER FOR PAROLE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 24-21-230, 24-21-240, 24-21-250, 24-21-260, 24-21-270, 24-21-280, 24-21-290, 24-21-420, 24-21-430, RELATING TO PROBATION OFFICERS, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCES TO "OFFICERS" TO "AGENTS" AND REFERENCES TO "EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR" TO "COMMISSIONER"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-440, RELATING TO TIME PERIODS OF PROBATION, SO AS TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE COURT MUST ENTER A DISCHARGE ORDER UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROBATION PERIOD; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-450, RELATING TO REVOCATION OF PAROLE, SO AS TO CHANGE REFERENCES TO "OFFICER" TO "AGENT"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-480, RELATING TO RESTITUTION CENTERS, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE BOARD TO PLACE A PRISONER IN A RESTITUTION CENTER AS A CONDITION OF PAROLE; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-620, RELATING TO PAROLE BOARD REVIEWS, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCE TO THE "COMMISSIONER OF PAROLES AND PARDONS" TO "COMMISSIONER"; TO AMEND SECTIONS 24-21-645 AND 24-21-650, RELATING TO THE BOARD, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCES TO "EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR" TO "COMMISSIONER"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-660, RELATING TO A PAROLED PRISONER'S CUSTODY, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT THE PRISONER REMAIN IN THE BOARD'S "JURISDICTION" RATHER THAN IN THE BOARD'S "LEGAL CUSTODY"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-680, RELATING TO REVOCATION OF PAROLE, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE PAROLE AGENT TO ISSUE A CITATION UPON THE VIOLATION OF PAROLE AND TO GRANT THE BOARD THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A FINAL DETERMINATION AS TO REVOCATION RATHER THAN CANCELING THE ORDER OF PAROLE AND GIVING THE PRISONER THE STATUS OF AN ESCAPED CONVICT; TO AMEND 24-21-930, RELATING TO PAROLE ORDERS, SO AS TO CHANGE REFERENCES TO "EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS" TO "COMMISSIONERS"; TO AMEND SECTION 24-21-990, RELATING TO THE EFFECTS OF A PARDON, SO AS TO ALLOW A PARDONED PRISONER TO HOLD PUBLIC OFFICE EXCEPT AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 16-13-210 AND TO PROVIDE THAT A PARDON DOES NOT EXPUNGE A RECORD OF CONVICTION; TO AMEND SECTION 24-23-130, RELATING TO THE SUPERVISION OF A PROBATIONER, SO AS TO CHANGE THE REFERENCES TO "OFFICER" TO "AGENT"; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 24-21-14, RELATING TO THE COMMISSIONER OF PAROLES AND PARDONS.
Rep. WILKINS moved that upon the completion of the Ratification of Acts, that the House stand adjourned, which was agreed to.
At 11:50 A.M. the House attended in the Senate Chamber, where the following Acts were duly ratified.
(R177) S. 534 -- Senators Helmly, Land, Rose, Passailaigue and Long: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 12-9-310, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO WITHHOLDING REQUIREMENTS FROM CERTAIN PAYMENTS FOR STATE INCOME TAX PURPOSES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE EXEMPTION FROM WITHHOLDING REQUIREMENTS OF UTILITIES HIRING OR CONTRACTING WITH NONRESIDENT UTILITIES TO PERFORM SERVICES OF A TEMPORARY NATURE RELATING TO DAMAGE CAUSED BY NATURAL FORCES ALSO INCLUDES ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES AND ALSO APPLIES TO COUNTIES MAKING SUCH PAYMENTS TO A PERSON NOT IN ITS REGULAR EMPLOY, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THESE PROVISIONS RELATING TO COUNTIES ARE RETROACTIVE TO DECEMBER 31, 1988; AND TO ADD SECTION 12-37-905 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT EVERY PERSON REQUIRED BY LAW TO MAKE A PROPERTY TAX RETURN TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR MUST FILE THE RETURN WITH THE COUNTY AUDITOR ON OR BEFORE APRIL THIRTIETH FOR PROPERTY OWNED AS OF THE PRECEDING DECEMBER THIRTY-FIRST.
(R178) S. 431 -- Senator Drummond: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 34-11-60, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO BAD CHECKS, SO AS TO SPECIFICALLY MAKE IT UNLAWFUL TO DRAW, MAKE, UTTER, ISSUE, OR DELIVER A BAD CHECK FOR PAYMENT ON A LEASE AGREEMENT OR TO PAY RENT; AND TO PROVIDE THAT NO WARRANT FOR DRAWING AND UTTERING A FRAUDULENT CHECK MAY BE OBTAINED MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS AFTER THE DATE THE CHECK WAS UTTERED.
(R179) S. 707 -- Banking and Insurance Committee: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 38-73-1425 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE FINAL RATE OR PREMIUM CHARGE FOR A PRIVATE PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RISK CEDED TO THE REINSURANCE FACILITY; TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-455, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATES, SO AS TO LIMIT THE PROHIBITION ON MEMBER COMPANIES OF AN AFFILIATED GROUP OF AUTOMOBILE INSURERS IN UTILIZING DIFFERENT FILED RATES; TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-280, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE COLLISION AND COMPREHENSIVE COVERAGE, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE THE REFUSAL TO WRITE CERTAIN COVERAGE; AND TO AMEND SECTION 38-77-950, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO USE OF THE REINSURANCE FACILITY BY AN INSURER, SO AS TO REQUIRE NOTICE TO POLICYHOLDERS OF CERTAIN RISKS CEDED TO THE FACILITY.
(R180) S. 789 -- Senator Bryan: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 4-9-30, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE POWERS GRANTED TO COUNTIES, SO AS TO REVISE AND REAUTHORIZE THE METHOD BY WHICH A SPECIAL TAX DISTRICT IS CREATED.
(R181) S. 843 -- Judiciary Committee: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 14-3-330, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN LAW CASES, SO AS TO DELETE THE TIME PERIOD WITHIN WHICH NOTICE OF APPEAL MUST BE GIVEN IN ORDER TO CONFORM THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA APPELLATE COURT RULES; TO AMEND SECTION 18-9-10, RELATING TO WHEN AN APPEAL MAY BE TAKEN TO THE SUPREME COURT, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE PROCEDURE FOR TAKING AN APPEAL IS AS PROVIDED BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA APPELLATE COURT RULES; TO REPEAL SECTIONS 14-3-650, RELATING TO THE DOCKETING FEE IN CIVIL CASES, 18-9-250, RELATING TO THE PRINTING OF TESTIMONY, 18-9-300, RELATING TO THE CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT ATTACHING A COPY OF THE OPINION OF THE COURT TO THE JUDGMENT REMITTED TO THE COURT BELOW, AND SECTION 20-7-2225, RELATING TO NOTICE OF APPEALS FROM THE FAMILY COURT, WHICH SECTIONS ARE REPLACED BY PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA APPELLATE COURT RULES; AND TO PROVIDE THE SOUTH CAROLINA APPELLATE COURT RULES SHALL CONTROL WHEN IN CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF STATUTORY LAW EXCEPT THAT THESE RULES MAY NOT EFFECT ANY SUBSTANTIVE RIGHT OF ANY PARTY IN A CIVIL OR CRIMINAL MATTER.
(R182) H. 3051 -- Rep. D. Elliott: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 5-37-20, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE DEFINITIONS USED IN THE MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1973, SO AS TO INCLUDE WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF "IMPROVEMENTS" THE WIDENING AND DREDGING OF CHANNELS, CANALS, AND WATERWAYS USED FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES; AND TO AMEND SECTION 5-37-90, RELATING TO THE REMOVAL, ALTERATION, OR CHANGE OF AN IMPROVEMENT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 5-37-20, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE IMPROVEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE THE SOLE AND UNRESTRICTED PROPERTY OF THE MUNICIPALITY, STATE, OR OTHER PUBLIC ENTITY.
(R183) H. 3350 -- Reps. Burch, Hodges, Haskins, Cole, Huff, J. Harris, Baker and Keesley: AN ACT TO AMEND ARTICLE 9, CHAPTER 3, TITLE 16, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO KIDNAPPING, SO AS TO DECREASE THE PENALTY FOR KIDNAPPING AND CONSPIRACY TO KIDNAP FROM A MAXIMUM LIFE IMPRISONMENT TO THIRTY YEARS.
(R184) H. 3529 -- Rep. Keyserling: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 60-11-40, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA COMMISSION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY, SO AS TO AUTHORIZE EACH EX OFFICIO MEMBER TO DESIGNATE A PERSON TO REPRESENT HIM UPON APPROVAL OF THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE RESPECTIVE INSTITUTION.
(R185) H. 3832 -- Rep. Kirsh: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 59-121-55, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE NONPROFIT ELEEMOSYNARY CORPORATION FORMED TO PROVIDE SCHOLARSHIP AND OTHER COLLEGE SUPPORT FOR THE CITADEL, SO AS TO MAKE A TECHNICAL CORRECTION IN THE SECTION TO ALLOW FUNDS AND PROPERTY ACQUIRED BEFORE AND AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE SECTION TO BE TRANSFERRED TO THIS NONPROFIT ELEEMOSYNARY CORPORATION.
(R186) H. 3167 -- Rep. Kirsh: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTIONS 12-21-3400, 12-21-3420, 12-21-3440, 12-21-3450, 12-21-3460, AND 12-21-3530, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF BINGO, SO AS TO PROVIDE A METHOD FOR A PROMOTER'S BINGO LICENSE AND A NONPROFIT BINGO LICENSE TO BE TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER LOCATION, TO PROVIDE FOR NO ADDITIONAL FEES FOR LOCATION TRANSFERS, REVISE AMOUNTS WHICH MUST BE RETURNED AS PRIZES, REVISE CLASS E LICENSE REQUIREMENTS, PROVIDE THAT THE SPECIAL TICKET FOR ENTRY INTO CLASS AA AND B LICENSE BINGO GAMES MUST BE TORN IN HALF WHEN THE PLAYER ENTERS, TO ALLOW A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION TO HOLD ONLY ONE BINGO LICENSE, TO PROVIDE THAT THE REQUIRED BOND IS SECURITY FOR ALL STATE TAXES, PENALTIES, INTEREST, FINES, FEES, AND WARRANT COSTS, AND TO DELETE THE BOND REQUIREMENT FOR CLASS E LICENSES.
(R187) H. 3701 -- Reps. R. Young, Fulmer, Rama, Hallman and Gonzales: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 57-3-910, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO IDENTIFICATION CARDS ISSUED BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FOR NONDRIVERS, SO AS TO WAIVE THE FEE FOR PERSONS WHO ARE MENTALLY ILL, MENTALLY RETARDED, HOMELESS, OR ON PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, TO PROVIDE DEFINITIONS AND PROCEDURES FOR VERIFICATION OF HOMELESSNESS, AND TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT TO REPORT THE FISCAL IMPACT AFTER ONE YEAR.
(R188) H. 3358 -- Rep. Altman: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 56-5-4090, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO LENGTH OF LOAD ON POLE TRAILERS OR CARRIERS, SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR LIMITATIONS DURING DAYLIGHT HOURS AND CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS.
(R189) H. 3412 -- Rep. Waldrop: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 12-31-15, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CERTAIN CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FOR COUNTY AUDITORS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-45-15, RELATING TO CERTAIN CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FOR COUNTY TREASURERS, SO AS TO REVISE THESE REQUIREMENTS AND THE PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO SATISFACTORILY COMPLETE THEM.
(R190) H. 3713 -- Rep. Hodges: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 43-5-235, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REIMBURSEMENT ALLOWED COUNTIES, CIRCUIT SOLICITORS, AND CIRCUIT COURTS FROM THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTION AND PATERNITY DETERMINATION PROGRAMS, SO AS TO ALLOW REIMBURSEMENT FOR SHERIFFS.
(R191) H. 3185 -- Rep. Kirsh: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 34-9-130, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT A BANK OR BANKING INSTITUTION MUST ESTABLISH A SURPLUS ACCOUNT AND THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO BE KEPT IN IT AND IN A MINIMUM DEPOSIT RESERVE, SO AS TO DELETE THOSE REQUIREMENTS AND REQUIRE EVERY STATE BANK WHICH IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM TO MAINTAIN THE SAME RESERVES AGAINST DEPOSITS AS IS REQUIRED FOR A STATE BANK WHICH IS A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY MUST BE MAINTAINED; AND TO AMEND SECTION 12-13-30, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT AN ASSOCIATION LOCATED IN THIS STATE MUST PAY INCOME TAX MEASURED BY ITS NET INCOME FROM ALL SOURCES, WITH CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS, SO AS TO CLARIFY THAT INTEREST EARNED ON DEPOSITS AT THE FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF ATLANTA FOR THESE ASSOCIATIONS WHICH MEET THE THRIFT LENDER TEST SET BY FEDERAL LAW IS EXEMPT.
(R192) H. 3721 -- Reps. Burriss and McAbee: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 16-14-10, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE DEFINITIONS USED IN THE FINANCIAL TRANSACTION CARD CRIME ACT, SO AS TO DEFINE "ACQUIRER"; AND TO AMEND SECTION 16-14-60, RELATING TO FINANCIAL TRANSACTION CARD FRAUD, SO AS TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR A PERSON TO REPRESENT TO AN ACQUIRER THAT HE HAS AUTHORIZATION TO USE A CREDIT CARD ACCOUNT NUMBER FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING MONEY, GOODS, SERVICES, OR ANYTHING ELSE OF VALUE, FOR A SALE WHICH WAS NOT MADE BY THAT PERSON, AND TO ALSO MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR A PERSON, WITHOUT THE ACQUIRER'S EXPRESS AUTHORIZATION, TO EMPLOY OR SOLICIT AUTHORIZED MERCHANTS, OR ANY AGENT OR EMPLOYEE OF THE MERCHANT, TO REMIT TO AN ISSUER OR ACQUIRER, FOR PAYMENT, A FINANCIAL TRANSACTION CARD RECORD OF SALE FOR A SALE WHICH WAS NOT MADE, AND TO PROVIDE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION.
(R193) H. 3073 -- Reps. P. Harris, Carnell, J. Harris and Mattos: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING CHAPTER 22 TO TITLE 44 SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR THE RIGHTS OF MENTAL HEALTH PATIENTS; AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 44-17-820, 44-23-1090, 44-52-170, AND 44-52-190 RELATING TO THE RIGHTS OF MENTAL HEALTH PATIENTS.
(R194) H. 3767 -- Reps. Foster, Kirsh, Hayes and Meacham: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 49-29-230 SO AS TO DESIGNATE PORTIONS OF THE LITTLE PEE DEE RIVER, THE BROAD RIVER, AND THE SALUDA RIVER AS SCENIC RIVERS; AND TO REPEAL SECTION 1 OF JOINT RESOLUTION 385 OF 1990 RELATING TO DESIGNATION OF A PORTION OF THE LITTLE PEE DEE RIVER AS A SCENIC RIVER.
(R195) H. 3629 -- Rep. Koon: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-1380, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO MEMBERS OR SUBSCRIBERS OF RATING ORGANIZATIONS UTILIZING RATES OR PREMIUM CHARGES FOR PRIVATE PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COVERAGES, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE APPROVAL AND PUBLIC HEARING REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION ARE NOT REQUIRED TO APPROVE AN EXPENSE COMPONENT FILED BY A MEMBER OR SUBSCRIBER FOR ANY LINE OF INSURANCE EXCEPT PRIVATE PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, UNLESS THAT MEMBER'S OR SUBSCRIBER'S TOTAL WRITTEN PREMIUMS FOR THAT LINE DURING THE PREVIOUS CALENDAR YEAR EQUALED OR EXCEEDED THREE PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WRITTEN INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR THAT LINE FOR THAT YEAR.
(R196) H. 3164 -- Rep. McAbee: AN ACT TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO CLOSE AND REMOVE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM A PORTION OF ROAD S-33-256 IN MCCORMICK COUNTY, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN RIGHTS OF THE COMMISSION OF PUBLIC WORKS OF THE TOWN OF MCCORMICK.
(R197) H. 3764 -- Reps. Koon and Klapman: AN ACT TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO REMOVE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM THAT PORTION OF ROAD S-258 FROM HIGHWAY NO. 1 TO ROAD S-255 IN LEXINGTON COUNTY AND TO TRANSFER IT TO THE TOWN OF LEXINGTON.
(R198) H. 3165 -- Rep. McAbee: AN ACT TO DESIGNATE A ROAD IN McCORMICK COUNTY AS "GARTRELL ROAD".
The Senate returned to the House with concurrence the following:
H. 3758 -- Reps. Kinon and Harwell: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO NAME THE BRIDGE ON HIGHWAY 22 OVER THE LITTLE PEE DEE RIVER IN DILLON COUNTY AS CARMICHAEL'S BRIDGE AND THE BRIDGE ON HIGHWAY 45 OVER THE LITTLE PEE DEE RIVER IN DILLON COUNTY AS CAMPBELL'S BRIDGE.
At 12:00 Noon the House in accordance with the motion of Rep. WILKINS adjourned to meet at 10:00 A.M. tomorrow.
This web page was last updated on
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 at 8:53 A.M.