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 4160, Apr. 12 | Printed Page 4180, Apr. 12 |

Printed Page 4170 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

effective at the close of business on that date. A delayed effective date for a document may not be later than the ninetieth day after the date filed.
OFFICIAL COMMENT

Section 1.23(a) provides that documents accepted for filing become effective at the time and date of filing, or at another specified time on that date, unless delayed effective date is selected under section 1.23(b). This section gives express statutory authority to the common practice of most secretaries of state of ignoring processing time and treating a document as effective as of the date it is submitted for filing even though it may not be reviewed and accepted for filing until several days later.

Section 1.23(a) requires secretaries of state to maintain a date and time stamp for recording the receipt of documents and provides that documents become effective at the stamped time on the date of filing. This provision should eliminate any doubt about situations involving same-day transactions in which documents, for example articles of merger, are filed on the morning of the date the merger is to become effective. Section 1.23(a) contemplates that the time of filing, as well as the date, will be routinely recorded.

Section 1.23(b) provides an alternative method of establishing the effective date of a document. The document itself may fix as its effective date any date within 90 days after the date it is filed; it may also fix the time it becomes effective on that date. If no time is specified, the document becomes effective as of the close of business on the specified date. The Model Act also allows the effective date fixed in a document to be corrected to a limited extent. See the Official Comment to Section 1.23.

Section 1.23(b) does not authorize or contemplate the retroactive establishment of an effective date before the date of filing. Official Comment to Section 1.23 of the Model Business Corporation Act.
SOUTH CAROLINA REPORTERS' COMMENTS

This section has no counterpart in the former nonprofit statutes. The former law required a three-day public notification of an intent to form a nonprofit corporation and then an investigation by the Secretary of State before the nonprofit charter could be issued (former Sections 33-31-20 and 33-31-60). Former Section 33-31-50 did provide that upon filing the Declaration, First Report, and $25 in fees that the Secretary of State was to issue the Certificate of Incorporation for the proposed term. This section is, however, identical to Section 33-1-230 of the South Carolina Business Corporation Act.


Printed Page 4171 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

Section 33-31-124. Correcting filed document.

(a) A domestic or foreign corporation may correct a document filed by the Secretary of State if the document:

(1) contains an incorrect statement; or

(2) was defectively executed, attested, sealed, verified, or acknowledged.

(b) A document is corrected:

(1) by preparing articles of correction that:

(i) describe the document, including its filing date, or attach a copy of it to the articles;

(ii) specify the incorrect statement and the reason it is incorrect or the manner in which the execution was defective; and

(iii) correct the incorrect statement or defective execution; and

(2) by delivering the articles of correction to the Secretary of State.

(c) Articles of correction are effective on the effective date of the document they correct except as to persons relying on the uncorrected document and adversely affected by the correction. As to those persons, articles of correction are effective when filed.
OFFICIAL COMMENT

Section 1.24 permits making corrections in filed documents without refiling the entire document or submitting formal articles of amendment. This correction procedure has two advantages: (1) filing articles of correction may be less expensive than refiling the document or filing articles of amendment, and (2) articles of correction do not alter the effective date of the underlying document being corrected. Indeed, under section 1.24(c), event the correction relates back to the original effective date of the document except as to persons relying on the original document and adversely affected by the correction. As to these persons, the effective date of articles of correction is the date the articles are filed.

A document may be corrected either because it contains an `incorrect statement' or because it was defectively executed (including defects in optional forms of execution that do not affect the eligibility of the original document for filing). Official Comment to Section 1.24 of the Model Business Corporation Act.
SOUTH CAROLINA REPORTERS' COMMENTS

This section has no counterpart in the former provisions of Chapter 31, Title 33. Former Section 33-31-90 provided that:
No irregularity in complying with the provisions of this article shall be held to vitiate the incorporation until a direct proceeding to set aside and annul the charter be instituted by the proper authorities of the State. And all acts done and contracts entered into shall have the


Printed Page 4172 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

same force and effect as if no irregularity had existed. Any corporation heretofore formed for any of the purposes enumerated in Section 33-31-20 shall be deemed to have qualified under the provisions of Section 33-31-10.

This new Section 33-31-124, however, is identical with Section 33-1-240 of the South Carolina Business Corporation Act.

Section 33-31-125. Filing duty of the Secretary of State.

(a) If a document delivered to the office of the Secretary of State for filing satisfies the requirements of Section 33-31-120, the Secretary of State shall file it.

(b) The Secretary of State files a document by stamping or otherwise endorsing `filed', together with his name and official title and date and time of receipt, on both the original and document copy, together with a further endorsement that the document is a true copy of the original document. After filing a document, except as provided in Sections 33-31-503 and 33-31-1510, the Secretary of State shall deliver the document copy to the domestic or foreign corporation or its representative and the document copy must be retained as part of the permanent records of the corporation.

(c) Upon refusing to file a document, the Secretary of State shall return it to the domestic or foreign corporation or its representative within five days after the document was delivered, together with a brief, written explanation of the reason or reasons for the refusal.

(d) The Secretary of State's duty to file documents under this section is ministerial. His filing or refusing to file a document does not:

(1) affect the validity or invalidity of the document in whole or in part;

(2) relate to the correctness or incorrectness of information contained in the document; or

(3) except as provided in Section 33-31-127, create a presumption that the document is valid or invalid or that information contained in the document is correct or incorrect.
OFFICIAL COMMENT

1. Filing Duty in General

Under section 1.25 the secretary of state is required to file a document if it `satisfies the requirements of section 1.20.' This language should be contrasted with earlier versions of the Model Act (and many state statutes) that required the secretary of state to ascertain whether the document `conformed with law' before filing it. The purpose of this change is to limit the discretion of the secretary of state to a ministerial role in reviewing the contents of documents. If the document submitted


Printed Page 4173 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

is in the form prescribed and contains the information required by section 1.20 and the applicable provision of the Model Act, the secretary of state under section 1.25 must file it even though it contains additional provisions the secretary of state may feel are irrelevant or not authorized by the Model Act or by general legal principles. consistently with this approach, section 1.25(d) states that the filing duty of the secretary of state is ministerial and provides that filing a document with the secretary of state does not affect the validity or invalidity of any provision contained in the document and does not create any presumption with respect to any provision. Persons adversely affected by provisions in a document may test their validity in a proceeding appropriate for that purpose. Similarly, the attorney general of the state may also question the validity of provisions of documents filed with the secretary of state in an independent suit brought for that purpose; in neither case should any presumption or inference be drawn about the validity of the provision from the fact that the secretary of state accepted the document for filing.

2. Mechanics of Filing

Section 1.25(b) provides that when the secretary of state files a document, he stamps or endorses it as filed, retains the signed original document for his records, and returns the exact or conformed copy (which must accompany the document under section 1.20(i) to the corporation or its representative with the secretary of state's fee receipt or acknowledgement of receipt if no fee is required. This will establish that a document has been filed in the form of the copy. considerations was given to dispensing with the document copy entirely and providing only for the return of a fee receipt or equivalent document Several states currently follow this practice with respect to articles of incorporation and other documents. It was felt to be important, however, to continue a practice by which each corporation receives back from the secretary of state for its records a document that on its face shows that it is an exact or conformed copy of the document that was filed with the secretary of state. This copy is usually placed in the minute book and is available for informal inspection without requiring a person to examine the records of the secretary of state. Of course, a person desiring a certified copy of any filed document may obtain it from the office of the secretary of the state by paying the fee prescribed in section 1.22(c).

3. Elimination of Certificates of Incorporation and Similar Documents

Section 1.25(b) provides that acceptance of articles of incorporation or other documents is evidenced merely by the issuance of a fee receipt or acknowledgement of receipt if no fee is required. Earlier versions of the


Printed Page 4174 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

Model Act and the statutes of many states provided that acceptance by the secretary of state is evidenced by a `certificate' (e.g., of incorporation, of merger, or of amendment. This older practice was not retained in the revised Model Act because it was felt desirable to reduce the number of pieces of paper issued by the secretary of state. Under the older practice most state offices routinely issued both fee receipts and certificates. A single document -- the fee receipt or acknowledgment -- should sufficiently indicate that the document has been accepted for filing, and in fact many states in recent years have dispensed with the formal certificate.

4. Rejection of Document by Secretary of State

Because of the simplification of formal filing requirements and the limited discretion granted to the secretary of state by the Model Act it is probable that rejection of documents for filing will occur only rarely. Section 1.25(c) provides that if the secretary of state does reject a document for filing he must return it to the corporation or its representative within five days together with a brief written explanation of his reason for rejection. This rejection may be the basis of judicial review under section 1.26." Official Comment to Section 1.25 of the Model Business Corporation Act.
SOUTH CAROLINA REPORTERS' COMMENTS
1. Substantial revisions.

This section is a major change from the former provisions of Chapter 31, Title 33. In the past, former Sections 33-31-60, 33-31-70, and 33-31-80 imposed on the Secretary of State's office a duty to investigate whether the proposed corporation was entitled to be formed. In addition, former Section 33-31-170, Filing and recording of papers, provided that:
All papers required to be filed hereunder and all charters or amendments thereof that may be granted shall be filed under proper numbers and indexed by the Secretary of State. The charter or amendment shall be recorded within thirty days after receipt in the officer of the clerk of court or register of mesne conveyances in the county in which the corporation is organized.

The effect of the new law is to eliminate any duty (or authority) of the Secretary of State's office to make any initial investigations. (Earlier versions of the statute directed the Department of Welfare to review only proposed "charitable" nonprofit corporations, see 1944-45 Op.S.C. Attorney General, 166.) It likewise makes clear that the Secretary of State has a mandatory ministerial duty to file all documents proffered in the form prescribed by Section 33-31-120, and deletes any authority or discretion of the Secretary of State to withhold the filing of any document


Printed Page 4175 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

properly completed. There is no longer any requirement that the articles be filed in any county office.
2. Non-Model Act provisions

This section differs from the 1987 Model Act Official Text in four ways:

a. Continuing existing practice, the Secretary of State will endorse on the copy that it is a "true copy" of the original.

b. The Secretary of State has not, and will not, issue a separate receipt of payment. The conformed, stamped copy (and any canceled check)is sufficient verification of payment.

c. Also continuing existing South Carolina practice, subsection (b) requires the corporation to retain the conformed copy of the articles and any document as part if its official records.

d. Although the actual filing of a document does not generally create any presumption that the information contained in the document is correct, a certified document, pursuant to Section 33-31-127 shall be treated as being prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
3. Rejection of document within five days

There was debate whether it was reasonable, as is now required in the South Carolina Business Corporation Act, to require the Secretary of State to reject a document within 5 days, or whether he should have a longer time. The conclusion was to require the five-day period.

Section 33-31-126. Appeal from Secretary of State's refusal to file document.

(a) If the Secretary of State refuses to file a document delivered for filing to the Secretary of State's office, the domestic or foreign corporation may appeal the refusal to the court of Common Pleas for Richland County. The appeal is commenced by petitioning the court to compel filing the document and by attaching to the petition the document and the Secretary of State's explanation of the refusal to file.

(b) The court may summarily order the Secretary of State to file the document or take other action the court considers appropriate.

(c) The court's final decision may be appealed as in other civil proceedings.
OFFICIAL COMMENT

1. The Court With Jurisdiction to Hear Appeals From the Secretary of State

The identity of the specific court with jurisdiction to hear appeals from the secretary of state under section 1.26 must be supplied by each state when enacting this section. It is intended that this should be a court of general civil jurisdiction. It may either be the court located in the


Printed Page 4176 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

corporation's principal business office is located in the state or, if the corporation does not have a principal office in the state, the court located in the county in which its registered office is located. The annual report of the corporation must state where the principal office of the corporation (which need not be within the state) is located. See section 16.22. [South Carolina does not require an annual report.] Other sections of the Model Act also contemplate that the court with jurisdiction over substantive corporate matters will be designated in the statute.... It is expected that jurisdiction over litigation with respect to substantive matters will normally be vested in the court in the county of the corporation's principal or registered office. See the Official Comment to sections 7.03.

2. `Summary' Orders

In view of the limited discretion of the secretary of state under the Act, a `summary' order appears to be appropriate in section 1.26. Throughout the Model Act the term `summarily order' or similar language is used where courts are authorized to order action taken and the person charged with taking the original action has little or no discretion. The word `summary' is not used in a technical sense but to refer to a class of cases where the court might appropriately order that action be taken on the face of the pleadings or after an oral hearing but without any need to resolve disputed factual issues.

3. Burden of Proof and Review Standard

The revised Model Act, unlike earlier versions, does not address either the burden of proof or the standard for review in judicial proceedings challenging action of the secretary of state. It is contemplated that these matters will be governed by general principles of judicial review of agency action in each adopting state.

DERIVATION: Official Comment to Section 1.26 of the Model Business Corporation Act.
SOUTH CAROLINA REPORTERS' COMMENTS

It is anticipated that this section will be used very little. For governmental convenience and to reduce costs, the Court of Common Pleas for Richland County has been designated the appropriate court to hear these actions. In regard to the burden or proof and standard of review, please see the South Carolina Reporters' Comments to Section 33-1-260 of the South Carolina Business Corporation Act.

Section 33-31-127. Evidentiary effect of copy of filed document.

A certificate attached to a copy of a document filed by the Secretary of State, bearing his signature, which may be in facsimile, and the seal of this State, is conclusive evidence that the original document is on file with the Secretary of State and must be taken and received in all courts, public


Printed Page 4177 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

offices, official bodies, and in all proceedings as prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
OFFICIAL COMMENT

The secretary of state may be requested to certify that a specific document has been filed with him upon payment of the fees specified in section 1.22 (c). Section 1.27 provides that the certificate is conclusive evidence only that the original document is on file. The limited effect of the certificate is consistent with the ministerial filing obligation imposed on the secretary of state under the Model Act.

DERIVATION: Official Comment to Section 1.27 of the Model Business Corporation Act.
SOUTH CAROLINA REPORTERS' COMMENTS

This section is identical to the formerly applicable statute, Section 33-31-260 of the South Carolina Business Corporation Act.

This section, which goes beyond the Model Act, does two things. First, in keeping with Section 19-5-510 of the 1976 Code, Uniform Photographic Copies of Business and Public Records as Evidence Act, the statute "authenticates" certified copies. Second, this section provides an exception to the hearsay rule. The contents of the document are prima facie evidence of the truth of that stated in the document. This second feature is a non-Model Act provision, but is in conformity with the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 803(8), and in conformity with existing South Carolina common law. According to Prof. Walter A. Reiser, Jr. Comparison of the Federal Rules of Evidence With South Carolina Evidence Law, 53 (3rd. Ed. 1987):
The leading South Carolina case is State v. Pearson, 223 S.C. 377, 76 S.E.2d 151 (1953), which holds that `where public officers are under a duty to keep a record of transactions, which occur in the course of their public service, the official records and writings so made by such officers, or under their supervision, are of public nature and are ordinarily admissible in evidence as proof of their contents, even though not proved by the person who actually made the entries.'

The Secretary of State is routinely subpoenaed to testify in cases where all that is being asked of him is to confirm that a document is on file and does contain the information in the copy, for example, that a corporation was formed and named certain people as its initial directors. This type of information is basically uncontroverted, and thus to require the Secretary to actually testify in these many proceedings truly would be an unreasonable request and policy. There was discussion as to whether the language provided sufficient protection to the Secretary of State from being needlessly required to testify as to the content of various filed


Printed Page 4178 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

forms. The identical language in the South Carolina Business Corporation Act has been effective. This provision should be equally effective.

Section 33-31-128. Certificate of existence.

(a) A person may apply to the Secretary of State to furnish a certificate of existence for a domestic corporation or certificate of authorization for a foreign corporation.

(b) The certificate of existence or authorization sets forth:

(1) the domestic corporation's corporate name or the foreign corporation's corporate name used in this State;

(2) that (i) the domestic corporation is duly incorporated under the law of this State, the date of its incorporation, and the period of its duration if less than perpetual; or (ii) that the foreign corporation is authorized to transact business in this State;

(3) that all fees, taxes and penalties owed to the Secretary of State have been paid;
(4) that the Secretary of State has not mailed notice to the corporation pursuant to either Section 33-31-1421 or 33-31-1531 that the corporation is subject to being dissolved or its authority revoked;

(5) that articles of dissolution have not been filed; and

(6) other facts of record in the office of the Secretary of State that may be requested by the applicant.

(c) Subject to any qualification stated in the certificate, a certificate of existence or authorization issued by the Secretary of State may be relied upon as conclusive evidence that the domestic or foreign corporation is in existence or is authorized to transact business in this State.
OFFICIAL COMMENT

Section 1.28 establishes a procedure by which anyone may obtain a conclusive certificate from the secretary of state that a particular domestic or foreign corporation is in existence or is authorized to transact business in the state. The certificate will probably be a standardized form. The secretary of state is to make the judgment whether or not the corporation is in existence or is authorized to transact business from public records only and is not expected to make a more extensive investigation. In appropriate cases, the secretary of state may issue a certificate subject to specified qualifications.

Section 1.28(b)(3) refers only to taxes, fees, or penalties collected by the secretary of state or collected by other agencies and reported to the secretary of state. In some states the secretary of state may ascertain from other agencies that franchise or other taxes have been paid and include this information in the certificate. In states where this procedure does not unduly delay the issuance of certificates, section 1.28 may be revised


Printed Page 4179 . . . . . Tuesday, April 12, 1994

appropriately. Section 1.28(b)(3) relates only to taxes, fees, or penalties to the extent their nonpayment affects the existence or authorization to transact business of the corporation.

A certificate of existence or authorization that may be relied on as binding and conclusive is of material assistance to attorneys who may be required to give formal legal opinions in connection with corporate transactions. Official Comment to Section 1.28 of the Model Business Corporation Act.
SOUTH CAROLINA REPORTERS' COMMENTS

1. Former law

Former Section 33-31-160, Certified copy of charter or amendment as evidence of incorporation, provided:
A certified copy of the charter and any amendment thereof from the Secretary of State or from the clerk of the court or register of mesne conveyances of the county in which such charter is required to be recorded shall be sufficient evidence of the incorporation of a any corporation chartered under this article and of any amendment to its certificate of incorporation.

Obviously, this procedure has been dramatically changed.

2. Warning

The granting of the certificate of existence does not disclose whether there may be grounds which give the Secretary of State the right to begin dissolution proceedings. Nor will it disclose whether the corporation has violated the requirements of sections 33-31-170 - 33-31-173, and that the Attorney General is in the process of "canceling the corporation's articles of incorporation" for a domestic corporation or causing a foreign corporation to forfeit its right to operate in South Carolina. See section 33-31-174.

3. Certificate does not negate the possibility that other actions are pending to dissolve the corporation

The Attorney General (and in certain instances, the members) has the authority pursuant to Sections 33-31-1430 and 33-31-1431 to request that a nonprofit corporation be dissolved. Likewise, the Attorney General has the power to bring an action to revoke a foreign corporation's certificate of authority. See Section 33-31-1531. The certificate of existence will not negate the possibility that such actions are pending against the corporation or other events not within the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State. If an action has been brought under any of these sections, the corporation (or its officers or directors) will receive notice of the proceeding.


| Printed Page 4160, Apr. 12 | Printed Page 4180, Apr. 12 |

Page Finder Index