Journal of the House of Representatives
of the Second Session of the 110th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 11, 1994

Page Finder Index
| Printed Page 1990, Feb. 10 | Printed Page 2010, Feb. 10 |
Printed Page 2000 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
A. I think certainly litigation experience is helpful in regards to the basic skills that you would need to carry forward into whatever other functions that you wish to have as a practicing lawyer. They provided me the opportunity to do research, to write -- and writing; the opportunity to interview witnesses; in case of depositions, to flesh out issues that may have been part of the case; brief writing on the appeal; the actual arguments in court. I think it provided a wide range of opportunities.
Q. What do you consider to be your weaknesses in the areas of substantive and procedural administrative law and what would you do to correct those?
A. Certainly, I think it would be difficult to be familiar with each and every agency law and regulation that the Administrative Law Judge Division will end up handling. But what you need to bring with you is the ability or the skills needed in order to determine what you need to find out, the research skills, the writing skills, the ability to ask questions, ability to be able to go and -- go forth and find or determine where you need to go to obtain your answers.

I think that also that -- what I would do in order to try to familiarize myself is to research the law of a particular agency if that case is before me, to read any pleadings or other documents that may have been submitted with respect to that; if necessary, familiarize myself with the case law that may be available in that particular area.
Q. Have you undertaken any of this study to date?
A. I have not specifically undertaken any study, no. One of my functions with the Legislative Council, we do -- our office is responsible for handling the promulgation of regulations. I have reviewed the statutes that relate to the creation of the Administrative Law Judge Division; I have reviewed the changes as they relate to regulations and how the regulation process would be impacted.

I'm not as familiar with the contested case area, but certainly that is something that would have to be undertaken as cases come along and prevent problems.
Q. You said you looked at the regulation area. Have you given any thought to what the reasonableness and needs standard means?
A. No, I have not specifically thought about it. I think the terms are, of course, subject to interpretation. But in my mind what it means is, it means the balancing, basically, of the agency's need to promulgate or to have regulations in a particular area, balancing that against the public need and the need of private individuals, particularly for litigants that may come before those agencies.

Printed Page 2001 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
Q. What are you doing and what do you plan to do to avoid any kind of conflict between your public employment, working at Legislative Council, and your efforts to become an administrative law judge? You know, legislators are coming to you seeking -- asking you to draft legislation. How are you handling that and how will you handle that?
A. There are -- I consider myself to be a professional. There are mechanisms within our office that would allow a member to come in and to request that work be done, and, as you may be aware, we specialize in certain areas. Oftentimes a member may come in and not know which attorney to see. Those people usually go and talk with the Code Commissioner who then assigns the work. There are those steps that are available so that I can alleviate some of my contact with the members in that area.

I've also taken steps not to have access to the House and Senate chamber floors. As a member of the Legislative Council, I'm able to go in and discuss with members, if necessary, particular pieces of legislation and I have made a decision not to even approach the floor so that I can avoid any appearance that I may be using that office as a method of gaining access to members to discuss my candidacy.

And, of course, once this committee issues its report and we have been authorized to go forward and seek pledges, then I will take annual leave as necessary to accomplish that.
Q. What is your understanding of your ethical responsibilities as far as any work in political campaigns or in the area of an advancement of some issue in the political arena?
A. I understand that it is prohibited, and as a member of the Council I have gone so far as not to be associated with any political campaigns even though it may be allowed at this particular time.
Q. You indicated that you are Chairman of the By- Laws Committee for St. Peters Catholic Home School Association?
A. That's correct.
Q. It's not clear at this time whether home schooling matters will come before an ALJ, but if they do how would you handle those?
A. Certainly, if it relates to St. Peters I would definitely recuse myself. But because I may be familiar with a particular area or be familiar with by- laws on home school associations generally does not mean that I would necessarily have to recuse myself from a particular case.
Q. Have you ever been sanctioned or held in contempt by a court?
A. No, I have not.
Q. Have you ever been disciplined in the course of your employment?
A. No, I have not.

Printed Page 2002 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
Q. Have you sought directly or indirectly the pledge of a legislator for you for the position of an administrative law judge?
A. No, I have not.
Q. Are you aware of any efforts without your request to -- for votes -- to solicit votes for you as an administrative law judge?
A. No, I'm not.
Q. And I note, I think, with regard to your campaign contributions, you need to make a filing with the House and Senate Ethics Committees.
A. For this particular quarter, beginning January?
Q. Did you not have over $100.00 in expenditures?
A. I did have over $100.00 of expenditures. I'll make sure that that's done.
Q. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Questions from the Members? Senator McConnell.
EXAMINATION BY SENATOR MCCONNELL:
Q. Thank you. Have you sought the endorsement of any group of members of the General Assembly or any caucus of the General Assembly?
A. No.
Q. Have you participated in a formalized interview process other than the one today or the one by the South Carolina Bar?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Tell me about those.
A. I was contacted by letter by the South Carolina Legislative Black Caucus and asked if I would like to participate in an interview with them to discuss my qualifications. I met with two members of that body. We discussed my qualifications, much as we've done today and much as was done with the South Carolina Bar, and they indicated to me that there would be no action on their part with respect to endorsing any particular individual until after this committee had -- had issued its report. And I did not offer a pledge and -- I did not ask for a pledge and they did not offer a pledge.

I also participated with the Columbia Lawyer's Association. They sent me a letter asking if I would participate in introducing myself to their body; I responded to that. There was not a formal interview process.
Q. Have you directly or indirectly had any meetings or conversations pertaining to your candidacy with members of the Bar Screening Committee, Bar employees or lobbyists representing the Bar either before you were screened or after you were screened but prior to the Bar's screening report being made public?

Printed Page 2003 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
A. Other than conversations with respect to when the hearing was and providing information to them, no, I have not.
Q. And that would be what everybody else has talked about, the two or the three or the one, depending on what roll apparently you got?
A. Well, I -- they sent out a letter which was returned to them, so they contacted me about giving me that letter, and it was hand delivered to me, which was my first indication that they were actually conducting a screening process. I then responded to them with materials and it necessitated phone calls with them about delivering those materials, and then I was contacted by a member of their screening committee about setting up the interview.
Q. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Senator Moore.
EXAMINATION BY SENATOR MOORE:
Q. Ms. Lee, in regards to the Bar interview, do you recall what date you were contacted by the Bar representative to schedule the interview?
A. I was first contacted by telephone before New Year's and I was on annual leave and did not receive the call. I was contacted again on January 3rd, which I believe was a Monday, asking me to appear before the Bar Screening Committee on January the 5th, which I believe was Wednesday, at 10:00, and I appeared at that time at the South Carolina Bar Building.
Q. How many interviewers participated in your interview?
A. Two.
Q. Do you recall what sections of the state they reside?
A. I believe one was from Greenville and one was from Lexington.
Q. Did you have any previous acquaintance with either?
A. I had met the -- Donnie Myers was the person from Lexington and I had met him some time ago, but had had no contact with him since that first meeting.
Q. Did you furnish a list of references?
A. Yes, I did. I furnished a list of five references independent of those provided to this committee.
Q. Do you have any knowledge if they were contacted?
A. I know that two of them were contacted.
Q. When and how were you notified of the results?
A. A letter was hand delivered to me on Monday, January 10th.
Q. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir. Other questions? Thank you, Ms. Lee.
MS. LEE: Thank you.
Printed Page 2004 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
THE CHAIRMAN: William Kenneth Moore.
WILLIAM KENNETH MOORE, having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Moore, have you had a chance to review the Personal Data Questionnaire Summary?
MR. MOORE: Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is it correct?
MR. MOORE: Yes, sir. One addition. Several days ago I purchased a hundred shares of Proteon stock at $6.00 a share -- or $6.25, it promptly went down to $6.00. Other than that, nothing.
THE CHAIRMAN: That sounds familiar to most of us. Any other changes?
MR. MOORE: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: If not, do you have any objection to our making the summary a part of the record of your sworn testimony?
MR. MOORE: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: It will be done at this point in the transcript.

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY

1. William Kenneth Moore
Home Address: Business Address:
54 Doe Drive S. C. Attorney General
Little Mountain, SC 29075 P. O. Box 11549
Columbia, SC 29211

2. He was born in Augusta, Georgia on October 5, 1949. He is presently 44 years old.

4. He was married to Patricia Deleon on October 23, 1971. He has three children: Jessica Lauren, age 10; Alexzandra Jordan, age 8; and Eric Mitchell, age 5.

5. Military Service: November, 1971 - September, 1973; U.S. Army; Specialist 4th Class; ***-**-****; Honorable Discharge

6. He attended Augusta College in Augusta, Georgia, September, 1967 - August, 1971, B.A. Degree; the University of Alaska in Anchorage, Alaska, September, 1973 - May, 1974 (left to attend law school); and the University of South Carolina School of Law, June, 1974 - December, 1976, J.D.

Printed Page 2005 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
He has attended at least 12 hours of continuing legal education approved by the Commission on Continuing Lawyer Competence during the last five years. The general courses of study have included professional responsibility, criminal law, civil law updates and others.

9. Taught or Lectured: He has taught the subject of Code of Judicial Conduct at orientation courses for new magistrates and municipal judges. He has lectured at the Bridge the Gap program on the subject of Professional Responsibility.

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
In May, 1977, he began employment at the Attorney General's office. He was assigned to the post conviction section in the Criminal Division. In 1979, he became chief of the section. His primary duties included post conviction cases and prosecution of criminal cases. In 1982, he moved to the Consumer Fraud section of the office. Since 1982, he has become Assistant Director of the Criminal Division with his primary duties in the area of consumer fraud, antitrust, criminal appeals, prosecution of judicial standards cases and attorney grievance cases. He has also represented state agencies in various matters, including contested cases.

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell:He has not been listed in Martindale-Hubbell since he has not been engaged in private practice.

14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - rarely
State - often
Other - He has prosecuted a number of judicial standards and attorney grievance matters before hearing panels during that time.

15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 75%
Criminal - 25%
Domestic - 0%

Printed Page 2006 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 5%
Non-jury - 95%

Sole Counsel or Associate Counsel

17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Matter of Johnson, 302 S.C. 532. A judicial standards case in which the S. C. Supreme Court held that funds collected by a probate judge for having conducted hearings for the DMH should have been turned over to the county treasurer.
(b) Matter of Bowers, 400 S.E.2d 483. An attorney grievance matter in which the
S. C. Supreme Court held that compulsive gambling was no defense to conduct which otherwise warranted disbarment.
(c) Shaw v. State of S.C., 276 S.C. 190. A post conviction case by which Shaw unsuccessfully challenged his death sentence. Shaw and a co-defendant had been the first persons sentenced to the death penalty under S. C.'s present death penalty statute.
(d) Matter of Dobson, 427 S.E.2d 166 (1993). An attorney grievance case in which the S. C. Supreme Court found misconduct and rejected arguments for a statute of limitations in attorney grievance cases.
(e) Matter of Rollins, 281 S.C. 467. An attorney grievance case in which the S. C. Supreme Court reaffirmed that conduct which does not involve actual practice of law is subject to scrutiny and discipline.

18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Matter of Johnson, S. C. Supreme Court (see, #17a).
(b) Matter of Bruner, S. C. Supreme Court (attorney grievance case), 283 S.C. 114 (1984).
(c) Matter of Dobson, S. C. Supreme Court (see #17d), 427 S.E.2d 166 (1993).
(d) State of S. C. ex rel McLeod v. Coates, et al., S. C. Court of Appeals, 281 S.C. 86.
(e) Hayden v. State of S.C., S. C. Supreme Court, 278 S.C. 610 (1983).

Printed Page 2007 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
25. Occupation, business or profession other than the practice of law:
None he graduated from law school in 1977.

45. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
He is a member of the South Carolina Bar.

47. He has practiced law for approximately 16 years. During that time he has handled civil or criminal cases in all 16 judicial circuits in the state. He has handled jury and non-jury cases. He has briefed and argued cases before the S. C. Supreme Court, the S. C. Court of Appeals and the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. He has also represented state agencies in administrative matters, including contested cases.

For the past several years he has handled many cases on behalf of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline. He has prosecuted the cases before the hearing panels and has briefed and argued the cases before the S. C. Supreme Court.

During the past six years he has handled a number of matters on behalf of the S. C. Judicial Standards Commission. He has prosecuted judicial standards cases before the Commission and the S. C. Supreme Court. In addition, he has taught courses on the subject of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and he has agreed to assist the Board of Magistrate Certification by lecturing on the subject of judicial ethics.

48. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Dru H. Carter, Branch Manager
State Credit Union, Main Street Office
Columbia, SC 29201
343-0300
(b) Charles H. Richardson
365 Big Timber Drive, Lexington, SC
734-3685
(c) Harold O. Brown
100 Hickory Knob Hill Road, Irmo, SC 29063
781-7797
(d) Donald J. Zelenka
P. O. Box 11549, Columbia, SC 29211
781-0185

Printed Page 2008 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
(e) James G. Bogle, Jr.
Assistant Attorney General
6523 Olde Knight Parkway, Columbia, SC 29209

The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline reports that no formal complaints or charges of any kind have ever been filed against you. The records of the applicable law enforcement agencies, that being Richland County Sheriff's Office, Columbia City Police, SLED and FBI, are all negative. Judgement Rolls of Richland County are negative. Federal Court records are negative. No complaints or statements were received. No witnesses are present to testify against you. Prior to turning you over to Ms. McNamee for questioning, I give you the same opportunity as the others and that's to make a brief opening statement.
MR. MOORE: And I'll waive, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Moore. Ms. McNamee.
MS. MCNAMEE: Thank you.
MR. MOORE - EXAMINATION BY MS. MCNAMEE:
Q. Mr. Moore, would you please tell the committee the most important thing that everyone here needs to know about you and your candidacy for an administrative law judge?
A. I think the most important thing that you need to know are actually two or three things. Number one is I think I have a broad base of experience that qualifies me for this job. I've been working for sixteen and a half years at the Attorney General's Office, so I obviously don't move from job to job very easily or very quickly.

I've handled cases in all sixteen judicial circuits in the state and I've handled judicial standards matters. I've handled the complex and the mundane. I've been in Magistrate's Court, the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, so I think I have a broad -- extraordinarily broad base of experience.

The other thing, I think, is my ability and my understanding of the need to be fair, because I think that's what determines whether or not a judge is a good judge, is whether the person is fair. And I think I have
-- if you talk to people that I've been associated with over the past sixteen and a half years, they will uniformly say, I hope, that Ken Moore is a fair person.
Q. That goes right into my next question. In those sixteen and a half years you've had a chance to observe many judges, and I wondered if you would share with the committee what you thought were the other qualities, aside from being fair and that's most important as I understand your

Printed Page 2009 . . . . . Thursday, February 10, 1994
testimony, the other qualities that are very important for a judge and for an administrative law judge?
A. Well, I think the most important thing not only for a judge but I think for just about anybody is to understand
-- you have to understand my general philosophy of life, which is basically treat people like you would like to be treated. That means honestly, sincerely, fairly and with respect and courtesy, and I think those are the hearts of not only a good judge but basically a good legislator or a good person in general.
Q. You have experience most recently, I guess, in criminal -- more experience, let me say, in criminal appeals and the attorney grievance and judicial standards areas. You also say, though, in your PDQ that you represented the state in various other matters in contested cases. Could you give us an example of some of those?
A. Well, several years ago I handled matters for the Board of Penal Services, contested cases before that board. I presently handle matters for the Auctioneers Commission. I'm their AG's representative so I advise them and appear at hearings if they need me to appear. Those are the two agencies that I've had the most contact with.

The Board of Commissioners on Judicial Standards and the Attorney Grievance section, those are not purely, I don't think, administrative law related work, but I've done a lot of work for them also.
Q. How will the Auctioneer's Commission use you? What do you do for them?
A. I generally -- I give them legal advice when they need legal advice. If they have a contested hearing I will appear at the hearing to advise the board. I will assist them in drafting orders, preparing final orders. I represent them, of course, on appeal. We have at least one case right now. In fact, I think we have only one case right now. It's on appeal to the Circuit Court and I, of course, will represent them in that proceeding.
Q. What is your understanding of why the Administrative Law Judge Division was established?
A. Well, I think it was established and I believe that the motivation was simply to bring about what I perceive is going to be a substantial improvement in the administrative law system in this state. I think the Administrative Procedures Act itself went a long way to doing that, but I don't think it's complete, that the system would be completely in place until you have professional administrative law judges who are trained in the law to hear these cases. And I think that will substantially improve the administration of that whole system, and I believe that was the motivation.

| Printed Page 1990, Feb. 10 | Printed Page 2010, Feb. 10 |
Page Finder Index