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 300, Jan. 13 | Printed Page 320, Jan. 13 |
Printed Page 310 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
A. I just say I can't talk to you about that. If they were to walk up to me in a restaurant -- now if someone comes into my chambers or calls me on the telephone and I've have -- I've done this a number of times lately because it seems like lawyers want to talk to you not necessarily about the merits of the case, but something involving their case and when they start talking to you about something that involves their case, there is always that question as to whether or not this is going to be an ex parte communication, so I have instructed my law clerk -- there's two way it happens. It either comes directly to me and it comes through my law clerk.

Let's talk about my law clerk first. If it comes by telephone or to my law clerk, then I'd say, well, what did they say it was about. They said, well, it was about the case. Be happy to talk with them, tell them they got to get in touch with the other side. I'll meet them at a time that's convenient for both of them or they can call me on the telephone.

I get a lot of conference calls as a result of that. One I had the other day, I finally got -- the lawyer called me back. I said I'll be glad to talk with ya'll, but you've got to have a conference call. I picked up the phone when they finally called me back and I hear the two lawyers talking to each other and one of them said, "I don't know what he wants with us, but we'll find out in a minute, I suppose." But anyway, you try to take care of it that way.

Now if somebody walks into my chambers and they start to talk with me about a case of some -- in some way, I just say wait a minute, I can't with you. Who is the lawyer on the other side and they'll tell me who the lawyer is on the other side. I say, well, are they outside, are they around? If they are, fine. Let's bring him here, we'll talk about this. If they're not, let's put this thing off until we can get him in here and talk about that -- except for temporary restraining orders which, of course, you have to do ex parte. But whenever I sign a Temporary Restraining Order, and periodically I do sign temporaries, I always put in my order that this -- that they have four days from the service of that order to petition the court for me to change that order, so I got what amounts to a ten-day order is only good for four days if they will petition the court to do the change. I think basically I've answered your question with --
Q. Yes, you have.
A. -- ex parte and how I would handle it.
Q. Yes, sir. Judge, matters relating to bias and trying to avoid the appearance of bias would have any effect on your courtroom that we have asked each judge about their practice of recusal and what measurement

Printed Page 311 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
they use to determine the right case to recuse yourself in. How do you make that decision?
A. Recusal is something again that you have to do on a case by case basis. I have a number of situations. I have a brother-in-law that I used to practice law with and he is one of the active attorneys in Marion County, so consequently he is before the court on the civil end of the criminal side where I am holding court.

I knew this was going to be a problem, so once again I asked for an advisory opinion as to what to do. And I was given the opinion and I followed it and the opinion says that I am to announce in open court the relationship that I have with my brother-in-law and I am to give the other side the opportunity to ask me to disqualify myself on that case. I've had to disqualify myself on many cases that he's a party.

When it comes to the criminal side, I usually do it only once that term because the Solicitor there knows he's my brother-in-law. We used to practice all the time, but I will try to remember to do it at least once on the record, say, "Mr. Solicitor, do you have any problems with Mr. Williamson trying a cases before me?" None whatsoever. That's one way we can get rid of some of these cases and so we do that. Now that's with my brother-in-law.

If there is any type of lawsuit that involves an neighbor of mine or involves -- I have some stock in two banks, if it in anyway involves those banks or something, I personally take myself out of those cases. I don't want anybody to get in a position to say that I because of that situation have ruled in a particular way.

And there probably is some other situations, but I generally take care of those situations in this fashion. I will put on the record what the situation is and say, now, do ya'll want me to handle this or do you not want me to handle it. I certainly would not lean in favor of one side or the other because we're making a record and the record is going to be very evident whether or not I leaned in one way or the other. But if there is anybody who has the slightest amount of problems with me presiding over this case, you just speak and please don't hesitate to speak and you just speak and we can get another judge to try this thing. That's the way I handle it.
Q. Judge, in the area of pledges, you heard probably the question I asked Judge Westbrook. Have you sought the pledge of any Member of the General Assembly prior to the completion of the Screening process?
A. For this job?
Q. Yes, sir.

Printed Page 312 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
A. No, sir. Now, the reason I qualified for this job is because in 1991, I sought some pledges and that was when I was running for the Supreme Court, but I sought it for that race. I don't want that to indicate that I was seeking it for the next one.
Q. Yes, sir. And, Judge, finally, have you asked any third party to go to any Member of the General Assembly and seek your consideration for this race or any other race?
A. No, sir.
Q. Thank you. No more questions.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Couick. Any Members of the Committee have any questions? Seem to have none.
A. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you for coming. We appreciate it.
A. Thank you. I'm sorry to have taken so much of your time.
THE CHAIRMAN: That's quite okay. Good to see you again. Come back and visit.
A. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: We will now move to the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit for Greenville and Pickens County, the Honorable C. Victor Pyle, Jr. Mr. Pyle, if you'd come forward, please, sir. Raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
JUDGE PYLE: I do.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir. Have a seat. When you go to speak in that microphone, for some reason they seem to -- unless we speak right into them, they don't -- they're not what I'd call the state of the art. Have you had a chance to review the Personal Data Questionnaire Summary?
JUDGE PYLE: Yes, I have, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you know if it's correct or if it needs any clarification to it.
JUDGE PYLE: In two respects. Question 32 concerning lawsuits, I overlooked putting there subsequent to Hurricane Hugo, the pier was in Fallis (phonetic) Pier Village. I was a co-owner and personally named along with all the co-owners. Some other landowners were attempting to enjoin the reconstruction of the pier.
MR. COUICK: Would you name the group of owners? How was the case styled, Judge Pyle?
JUDGE PYLE: It was styled against the Fallis Pier Village and each individual co-owner.
MR. COUICK: And the action was bought by the Coastal counsel or --
Printed Page 313 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
JUDGE PYLE: No, it was brought by other landowners. Two other landowners on the beach attempting to enjoin reconstruction of the pier.
MR. COUICK: Do you have a copy of that pleading?
JUDGE PYLE: I can get it. I don't it have with me.
MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, if I might ask just one --
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir.
MR. COUICK: Was there any allegation of fraud, deceit or any type of --
JUDGE PYLE: No.
MR. COUICK: -- improper behavior in an individual or fiduciary capacity in that case?
JUDGE PYLE: No.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do we have the necessary information?
MR. COUICK: Yes, sir. I think that'd be fine.
THE CHAIRMAN: All right, we'll make that clarification. Is there anything else?
JUDGE PYLE: The only other thing, for whatever it's worth, if anything, on Question 47, I did not list there that I am listed in American Law Fourth Edition, for whatever that's worth.
THE CHAIRMAN: We have that one also. Anything else?
JUDGE PYLE: That's all I see.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any objection to making this summary a part of the record of your sworn testimony as if --
JUDGE PYLE: None at all.
THE CHAIRMAN: -- you stated it here today?
JUDGE PYLE: Huh-uh.
THE CHAIRMAN: I direct at this point that that be inserted into the transcript.

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY

1. C. Victor Pyle, Jr.
Home Address: Business Address:
170 Marshall Bridge Drive 310 County Courthouse
Greenville, SC 29605 Greenville, SC 29601

2. He was born in Greenville County, South Carolina on December 24, 1934. He is presently 58 years old.

4. He was married to Johanna Wright on June 8, 1957. He has three children: Louisa D. Pyle, age 34 (Liberty Life Insurance

Printed Page 314 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
Company); Sarah P. Fay, age 31 (self-employed, advertising consultant); and C. Victor, III, age 24 (Sea Grant Fellowship, E.P.A.).

5. Military Service: N/A.

6. He attended the University of South Carolina, 1953-1959; LLB, 1959; J.D., 1970; National Judicial College, 1980.

8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
He has earned a minimum of 15 hours per year of JCLE.

9. Taught or Lectured: Faculty Advisor, National Judicial College, 1988. He was responsible for 12 judges during a 3-week general jurisdiction course, including leading daily group discussions. In 1992, he taught 6 new Circuit Judges for 3 days covering all aspects of a Circuit Judge's duties. He has also lectured at one CLE and two JCLEs.

10. Published Books and Articles: Modernizing the Courts; TRAFFIC SAFETY; VOL 70; Number 3; March, 1970 (A National Safety Council Publication)

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
He began practicing law with his father in July, 1959, and continued in the general practice of civil and criminal law until October, 1976, at which time he was elected as judge of the Greenville County Court.

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell: His rating in October, 1976, when he left the practice of law was BV. His firm, Pyle & Pyle was AV.

20. Judicial Office:

Judge, Greenville Municipal Court, 1965-1968; appointed by City Council; criminal and traffic cases with sentence not exceeding $200 or 30 days. This was a part-time position.

Judge, Greenville County Court, 1976 - July, 1979; nominated by the Greenville County Bar Association and then appointed by the

Printed Page 315 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
Governor; civil jurisdiction up to $25,000; criminal jurisdiction concurrent with Circuit Court except as to murder, manslaughter, rape, etc.

Elected Circuit Judge at Large, August 16, 1979

Elected Resident Judge; Thirteenth Circuit; January 20, 1982; serving continuously since

21. Five (5) Significant Orders or Opinions:
(a) Judith Minyard Holtz, et al. v. Tommy Minyard, et al. Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. See 304 S.C. 225, 403 S.E.2d 634 (1991).
(b) State v. Larry Ford Allen, et al. Supreme Court affirmed. See 277 S.C. 595, 291 S.E.2d 459 (1982).
(c) John George Poulos, etc. v. Pete's Drive-In No. 3, et al. Court of Appeals affirmed. See 284 S.C. 264 (1985). Cert. den. by Supreme Court. See 286 S.C. 128 (1985).
(d) Jack Kent Cook, et al. v. Wilson C. Wearn, et al. No party appealed.
(e) Eula Stephens Turner, etc. v. Sentry Care, Inc., et al. Multimedia Publishing Co. (Intervenor) did not appeal order.

22. Public Office: South Carolina House of Representatives, 1969-1974; 1st Vice Chairman, Judiciary Committee, 1973-1974

28. He owns stock in SCANNA and Piedmont Natural Gas. He recuses himself in any case involving those companies.

32. Sued: Yes, by disgruntled litigants. All cases have been dismissed by way of Summary Judgment. Also sued by landowners attempting to enjoin reconstruction of a pier lost in Hurricaine Hugo.

45. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
Greenville County Bar Association; American Bar Association; South Carolina Bar; South Carolina Bar Association (until its abolition): Chairman, Young Lawyers Conference, 1963-1964; Executive Committee, 1964-1965; Circuit Vice President, 1966-1967

Printed Page 316 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
46. Civic, charitable, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
Poinsett Club; Greenville, South Carolina

47. Director, American Judicature Society, 1966-1970; Awarded Certificate of Performance ABA, 1964; 1 of 5 Traffic Court Judges in U. S. Receiving Award from ABA, 1968; Chairman, Advisory Committee on Standards of Judicial Conduct, 1980-1993; Member, Judicial Council of South Carolina, 1985-; Member, Circuit Judges Advisory Committee, 1982- ; President, S. C. Association of Circuit Judges; Member, Judicial Standards Commission, 1993-; Delegate to the National Conference of State Trial Judges, 1990-; Who's Who in American Law, 4th edition

48. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Deanna W. Bolding, Consumer Loan Officer
The First Savings Bank
P. O. Box 408, Greenville, SC 29602-0408
458-2000
(b) Eugene C. Covington, Jr., Esquire
Covington & Patrick, P.A.
P. O. Box 2343, Greenville, SC 29602
242-9000
(c) John E. Johnston, Esquire
Leatherwood Walker Todd & Mann, P.C.
P. O. Box 87, Greenville, SC 29602-0087
242-6440
(d) Michael Parham, Esquire
Parham and Smith
P. O. Box 2800, Greenville, SC 29602
235-5692
(e) John A. Hagins, Jr., Esquire
Brown and Hagins
P. O. Box 2464, Greenville, SC 29602
271-7424

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE - ADDENDUM

2. Positions on the Bench:
Judge, Greenville Municipal Court, 1965-1968 (Part-time position)
Judge, Greenville County Court, October, 1967 - July, 1979

Printed Page 317 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
Circuit Judge at Large, August 16, 1979 - January 20, 1982
Resident Judge, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, January 20, 1982-

Moving on, the Board of Commissioners and Discipline reports that no Formal Complaints of any kind have ever been filed against you. The Judicial Standards Commission has no record of reprimands against you. The records of the applicable law enforcement agencies: the Greenville County Sheriff's Office, a negative; the Greenville City Police Department records, a negative; SLED and FBI records are negative. The Judgement Rolls of Greenville County are negative. Federal court records showed no judgements or criminal actions against you.

There were two civil rights actions brought against you. The first action was filed by an inmate against you and other county officials and summary judgment was granted in 1983. The other action was brought against you and a number of other attorneys. This action was dismissed in 1991. Does that appear to be an accurate reflection?
JUDGE PYLE: That's correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: My records further show that we have two complainants, two complaints that were received and two witnesses present to testify. I'm going to turn the questioning over to Mr. Couick and please answer any questions he might have, sir.
JUDGE PYLE - EXAMINATION BY MR. COUICK:
Q. Judge, just to get some administerial matters out of the way to begin with, could you tell me if your daughter lived with you in May of 1989?
A. She did not. She has not lived with me since nineteen eighty -- the latter part or '81, early part of '82.
MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, having found out that information I would ask that my whole question and his response be stricken from the record because it would be irrelevant to any other part of the proceedings.
THE CHAIRMAN: Without objection, so done.
Q. Judge, we've -- the Committee is very concerned generally about judicial temperament and would ask you to please describe your approach to service on the bench and your treatment of litigants and attorneys in your courtroom.
A. I attempt to treat all attorneys and all litigants alike. I try not to discriminate against anyone. In particular, I try to go out of my way to be pay more attention to pro se litigants since they're not familiar with the system, so I go out of my way to try to treat them a little bit different than I otherwise would an attorney practicing in the courtroom.
Q. In terms of the management of your docket, and it has more effect I would guess practically on attorneys rather than the litigants, how do you

Printed Page 318 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
balance that interest of moving ahead as quickly as possible with insuring that every attorney has the right to fairly and reasonably present his case?
A. That is -- it's difficult to do. As an administrative judge, you are required by the Chief Justice to move your docket. I attempt to do that with firmness. At the same time, I try to understand problems of the attorneys practicing before me. I was an active trial lawyer before going on the bench and I'm well aware of their problems and I try to compensate for those.
Q. As to the issue of ex parte communication, what is your approach to anything on that?
A. I do not engage in ex parte communications. As I mentioned on the questionnaire as the administrative judge, there are difficult areas. Just as an example, if an attorney calls you for a continuance, my first question to him is is he calling me with the consent of opposing counsel. If he says yes, then I will talk with him.

If he says that he has not talked with the opposing counsel, then I request that he contact him and either set up a conference call or come to see me, so there are from some gray areas. I'd say as an administrative judge, those are sometimes difficult.
Q. Yes, sir. In the area of the acceptance of gifts and whether that gift be a lunch or dinner or trip, et cetera, how do you handle those?
A. I accept ordinary social hospitality from attorneys. I sometimes will accept a luncheon invitation from an attorney.

There are some attorneys who are close to me, people that I grew up with, that I practiced law with, when I'm out with them, I do not allow them to pay for anything. So outside of an occasional luncheon with a lawyer or with the Bar -- Executive Committee of the Bar, obviously, I do not accept any.
Q. Perhaps I misunderstood part of your answer, Judge Pyle. Do you have any restriction as to time in terms if an attorney has a case up that week or that day --
A. Well --
Q. -- or the next week?
A. I'm sorry. If any attorney has a case up before me, I would certainly not have any contact whatsoever with him or her.
Q. From time to time concern has been raised about bias in the courtroom and this is no concern directed particularly towards you, but the issue of recusal has come up, both generally as to any type of conflict of interest, but more specifically toward the role of lawyer-legislators appearing in a courtroom. How do you handle that general concern and that more specific concern?

Printed Page 319 . . . . . Thursday, January 13, 1994
A. I've never hesitated to recuse myself if anyone does not want me to try their case. I've got enough cases to try that I -- you know, they'll find one of three or four other judges in town, so that has never presented any problem. With respect to lawyer-legislators, we have lawyer-legislators in Greenville and they practice before me. Except in trying to accommodate them during the Legislative session and trying to depose of the cases on Mondays and Fridays, but outside of that, they're treated the same as any other attorneys.
Q. You served as the administrative judge I believe for your Circuit?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you're probably often in contact with folks that also were involve in the management of the docket. I would imagine the Solicitor being one of those folks?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. From time to time you may disagree with his management of his docket, how do you handle that disagreement and in what forum do you handle it?
A. I am presently serving as the Chief Administrative Judge for General Sessions. I am generally able to get along quite well with my Solicitor. There have been times when we've not agreed and I've taken control of the docket and done it the way I wanted it done. And I believe under the Ordering in Point for Chief Administrative judges, I think that authority is given to me, but I think outside of that I'm still -- I would do it and I have done it.
Q. Yes, sir. Judge, I guess my question goes not more towards your authorization to change the docket, but whether that changing is done in a closed room discussion type fashion or whether it's something that -- where you enunciate some level of disappointment from the bench that would be publicly aired and show that there would be some division between the solicitor and the judge?
A. Well, I'm not sure again that I understand your question, but there have been times in the past when I've disagreed with the solicitor with respect to what cases are tried and in what order and I've taken him into chambers and explained that to him.
Q. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. That answers my question.
A. All right.
Q. Judge Pyle, I'll ask you the questions about pledging that I've asked each other candidate. Have you sought the pledge of a legislator prior to the completion of the screening process?
A. No, sir. Not at all.

| Printed Page 300, Jan. 13 | Printed Page 320, Jan. 13 |
Page Finder Index