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 5240, Apr. 28 | Printed Page 5260, Apr. 28 |
Printed Page 5250 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
A. In conjunction with other attorneys. I have not actually gone to court. I have helped other attorneys and general counsel because some of our cases have overlapped, so to speak.
Q. Have you been a guardian ad litem?
A. I have not been a guardian ad litem because I presume it's because of the potential conflict with the agency is there and --
Q. Have you handled an equitable distribution matter or consulted on it?
A. Yes, consulted on it.
Q. Consulted on it.
A. And have -- like I said, right now, I'm in the middle of handling one.
Q. And what about a juvenile proceeding, have you been in court?
A. As far as juveniles in the abuse and neglect, I have worked on special projects through the Solicitor here in Richland County in the area of juveniles and as well as abuse and neglect, so --
Q. Has your time in the court diminished as your position at DSS has moved up?
A. Yes. Somewhat it has and, like I say, I enjoy the courtroom very much and I've missed that. One thing about being a government lawyer, it seems that the more you excel and the higher you go and your efforts are recognized, you find yourself, or at least I found myself, in the position of making policy and management and really directing the runnings of a very tremendous program.

We're talking about ninety million dollars that was that collected last year and a lot of money being drawn down from the federal government, but I do manage the attorneys statewide and I do appear in court when I am needed and especially in the more complex -- some of our more complex cases.
Q. To you, rather, what are the differences that you see between being the advocate and being the judge?
A. Well, the judge is certainly not an advocate. A judge has to be impartial and look at both sides of a case and do what is in the best interest of the parties and especially the children. And I recognize that sometimes, or most often, I would think, that the truth is a little bit here and a little bit there and a judge has to be the one to make the decision as what the truth is or as close to it as possible.

There's -- the judge when -- when the two litigants and the two lawyers walk in the courtroom, the judge knows the least about the case, so there is a lot of reading into things the judge has to do. I think one of the most critical issues that our Family Court judges face now is in the area of juvenile crime. And, you know, a judge has a youth in front of him or her and a decision has to be made, is this juvenile a misguided youth who

Printed Page 5251 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
has not had the benefit of any upbringing or exposure to right and wrong and perhaps this child could be rehabilitated or could be worked with through mentoring, a mentoring program or otherwise and brought around? Or do we have a child who is just a criminal and is at an early age and when that decision is made or when that recognition is had by the judge, we've got to be aggressive with these kids. We've got -- the interest of the safety of our citizens outweighs the, perhaps, touchy, feely social services type of remedy, I think.
Q. What is your philosophy about the Family Court judges role in either being proactive or sitting back and not being proactive?
A. Well --
Q. Discuss that, please.
A. I'd be happy to and I can -- one of the -- one recent experience I have had and still am participating in it is the Welfare Task Force. It was a privilege for me to sit on that task force. And I can honestly say, however, that I think one link was missing and that was input from the judiciary. I don't think judges should be coming over here to the legislature to tell you legislators what to do, but I think a judge should remain available as a resource to let legislators or people in the community who care, who want to get some, you know, private program started, to act as a resource, to let folks know what they're seeing in the courtrooms. So to that extent, I think that's an important role that a judge should be willing to play and I would be willing to do that.
Q. Would you discuss for a minute the boundaries of your workday and your workweek, what does it look like?
A. Well, I am -- I didn't use to be. I've gotten in the habit since I became a mother of being an early riser and I try to get all the duties or responsibilities or things that I want to get done for my family done early in the morning and from there, it's full speed ahead. I hit the ground running.

I get to my office, you know, if I'm going to court, I'm sometimes there, you know, at 7:00, if I've got some things to get together and get on the road. But it's a day usually without lunch. I try to pack as much into every minute of my day as I can and again it's because I'm very conscious of the fact that I'm a public servant. The taxpayers are paying me to be there. And I'm going to pack as much into my day as I can. I move pretty quickly around my office because there is so much to do. And I work until I'm finished and the last thing I usually do in the afternoon is organize my day for the next day. I believe in being prepared.

Printed Page 5252 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
That's -- you've asked earlier in the day about how folks deal with their stress and that's one way that I deal with stress, I make sure I'm prepared to eliminate the stress of a particular situation that I'm anticipating to the extent that I can.
Q. How will you deal with writing orders in Family Court? You're going to be deluged with orders?
A. Yes.
Q. With cases?
A. And it is -- it would be a ridiculous statement for me to say that I'm going to write every order in every case that I hear because I know better than that. I deal with volume. And I know better than that. However, I love to write.

I have always -- I think that is one thing about law school I enjoyed and undergraduate school as well as a history and political science and sociology major. I love to write and I do a lot of writing in my work now just because I am the person who does write the policy, who does write contracts that we have with the Clerks of Courts and the Sheriff's Departments and, et cetera, and, in addition, to the writing associated with a case, so I would look forward to writing some of my own orders when it's feasible.

As far as my directing other lawyers to write the orders, they will have some pretty strict direction. The order will be my order, even if I do not put the words together. Certainly, the order will be my order or else it will be rewritten and it will be rewritten by me.
Q. Those areas of the Family Court jurisdiction and practice that perhaps you have been exposed to, but have not practiced as much in, how are you going to prepare yourself for that?
A. I feel like I have been preparing for that. I have gone to virtually every CLE Family Law related for the last five or six years or really every CLE that has been available, I'm there. I read. I keep up. I have a brief bank in my office, and this maybe something that is hard to believe, but when an Advance Sheet comes out with the exception of the last two or three weeks, when those Advance Sheets come back -- Advance Sheets come out on Family Court cases, I extract them, I read them. They are briefed and they are put in a brief bank. And I have about five or six huge notebooks in my office and I do that for myself as well as for the other lawyers on the staff because I am their resource also.
Q. Have you participated in the giving of any CLE?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Or writing any articles for Bar magazines or whatever?

Printed Page 5253 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
A. I've written an article for the -- for a national prosecution bulletin. I can't even remember the name of it, but I was asked to submit an article and I did. In the last three years and this year, I've been asked to -- I could not do it last year, but the last three years that they've had sort of a summary, hot tips type CLE, I've been asked to participate, which I have done. I enjoyed that.

I enjoyed that very much and I also do most of the public awareness, public speaking for my program as well as on behalf of the department, so when I'm asked to -- I taught many classes to paralegals and whatnot, they are evening classes that go from 6:00 to 9:00 in the evening. Any time, I'm asked to speak, I do because I very much enjoy it.
Q. Just as an aside, is DSS going to be doing the Ten Most Wanted anymore?
A. I'm almost finished. I'm working on the Tenth Most Wanted, so we're going to have another one coming out, yes.
Q. You listed five significant litigated matters, and you described their significance, but you did not list five domestic appeals?
A. I have not handled an appeal.
Q. You do not handle appeals, okay.
A. No.
Q. Have you ever been disciplined by a court that you've appeared before?
A. No, I have not.
Q. You own stock in several companies. Mrs. Strom, what will be your standard for recusal if it even comes up?
A. Well, I can't imagine that it would come up, but if it did, I would err on the side of caution and recuse myself.
Q. And you come from as you said a --
A. Or at least disclose, excuse me. At least disclose. I don't think that in every case a judge has to recuse him or herself. I think it's important -- the critical issue there is disclosure and whether or not I know whether I can -- first of all, I -- the parties should have some input as to whether or not they are comfortable or uncomfortable with me hearing a case, so disclosure is the most important aspect of that.
Q. Will that also be your standard concerning your husband's profession?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Let me ask in your experience, your legal career, what's been the most significant case you've dealt with?
A. Most significant --
Q. Case that you've handled.

Printed Page 5254 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
A. -- case?
Q. Uh-huh.
A. It was hard for me to really get those five cases together because when you have file rooms of two and three hundred thousand cases, I don't generally remember the names of cases, but I think one of the most significant ones I handled was a Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act case in which the daughter had been abused, sexually abused by the father the defendant in the case, since she was three years old. At the time she was about 14 or 15 and I was the person to whom she confided this information.

So, in addition to prosecuting the child support aspect of that case for her benefit and benefit of her brother, I also followed her throughout the prosecution of her father in General Sessions court. And she recently married and has just done real well. I've followed her throughout.
Q. In what ways have you sought this office? What have you been doing?
A. I have sent letters with accompanying resumes. I have been here almost every day to meet the members of the General Assembly, to give them a glimpse of who I am and why I'm here. And I also want to say that I have done this on my own time. The first couple of weeks of the session, I took annual leave to be here, but it occurred to me that even when I'm on annual leave, I'm still being paid by the taxpayers and I therefore spoke with our commissioner, Doctor Griswald about allowing me to be on leave without pay for the period of time I'm up here in pursuit of this personal objective. And so that's --
Q. Are you doing that several days a week? Are you doing that for a length -- like a full month or something like that right now?
A. For the period of time I'm up here.
Q. I see.
A. I have reduced my working hours basically is what I've done.
THE CHAIRMAN: So you've worked five hours a day and take three off or that kind of --
A. Exactly. Exactly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Okay.
A. In fact, I keep up with it pretty strictly. Plus, you know, obviously, the work has to get done, so the work gets done whenever it needs to get done, but I am on leave without pay for the period of time that I'm up here with you all.
Q. Have you sought directly or indirectly the pledge of any legislator?
A. No, ma'am.

Printed Page 5255 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
Q. Has that happened at all without, to your knowledge, by somebody else?
A. Not to my knowledge. I had many people ask what they could do to help me and I have been very meticulous in explaining to them what my understanding of the law is and, that is, that I cannot ask or would not ask them to do anything until after the screening report is released. I think there have been some letters written on my behalf, but they were not at my request.
Q. What do you feel about the role of mediation?
A. I think it's very important. I know that it's being done in other parts of the country. It's certainly being looked at here and done some here and I think it's very important. It's going to be a positive and contemporary way to handle the work load that the Family Court is facing right now.
Q. And, finally, you did mention mentorships and other kinds of institutes for juveniles. Do you have any other suggestions about dealing with the problems of juvenile crime? The things that you as --
A. I would --
Q. -- a Family Court judge could do?
A. Well, in fact, I have some -- I have gotten some information about this that I want to pass along to the people who need it, perhaps ya'll, I don't know.

There are some Federal grant monies available for a new program and I'm not real familiar with the details, so I'm -- and I apologize for that. But some Federal grant money is available to set up some boot camps which are a little -- have a little bit different flare and, again, I'm not real sure of the details, but they're doing it in Georgia.

Kids need discipline. Kids are -- a lot of them are not getting it at home and it's hard. You know, it's easy to be an irresponsible parent. It's very difficult and challenging to be a responsible parent. It takes time, work, effort, patience and a desire to be that way. And our kids, a lot of them aren't getting it. The government is going to have to step in. It's unfortunate, but I think it's true. And I think discipline is one of the basic characteristics that's missing now with our kids.
THE CHAIRMAN: Questions from the Members? Mr. Sturkie.
EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE STURKIE:
Q. This question has been asked and I just want to maybe go over it. One concern that I have, it's not a major concern, but I believe you have spent most of your legal career with the Department of Social services --
A. That's right.
Q. -- as the advocate -- not as an advocate, but as a judge should you be elected, do you feel that you would have any predisposition towards the

Printed Page 5256 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
position of DSS on a particular case because DSS does have quite a few cases before Family Court and I think many times, there are accusations DSS spends a lot of times in the news and I guess what I'm trying to get to, would you feel that your relationship to DSS would in any way effect the ability that you have to reach and look at all the facts rather than any kind of predisposition?
A. On the contrary, and I will tell you why, because I'm on the inside of DSS, I know very well what DSS does well and I know very well what DSS does not do well. And if you asked any of my colleagues at DSS, they would tell you that I'm one of the more vocal employees and people who have been involved in management and policy making and on the inside tracks of some of the contemporary issues that the department faces, and they will tell you that I don't agree with everything that DSS does by a long shot.

And that's one of the things I'd like to do from the bench is to -- it's not so much to work with DSS, but to be able to, or to be willing to address change, to address a problem and be willing to make some creative changes with DSS. That's something that I very much want to do. And as far as you as private practitioners, I have a very keen appreciation for you as private practitioners, my husband until recently was in private practice and I know very well that DSS is involved in volume cases and expediency is very important. But when you're talking about the private Bar, I know the private Bar must make a living and that a judge must be willing to -- a judge has to understand that and must be willing to be a little bit accommodating to the private Bar versus the fast pace of the DSS type cases.
THE CHAIRMAN: Other questions? Thank you, Ms. Strom. Our last candidate is H. Bruce Williams. Please raise your right hand.
H. BRUCE WILLIAMS, having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
THE CHAIRMAN: Have you had a chance to review your Personal Data Questionnaire?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, I have.
THE CHAIRMAN: And is it correct?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, it is.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any need for any clarifications, changes?
MR. WILLIAMS: The only thing I will do later is update on the amount of money spent for telephone calls and I will up date that as that is determined --
THE CHAIRMAN: All right.
MR. WILLIAMS: -- the information that you need, I'll be glad to do that.

Printed Page 5257 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have any objection at this time to our making the Summary a part of the transcript of record of this proceeding?
MR. WILLIAMS: No, I do not.
THE CHAIRMAN: It will be done.

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY

1. H. Bruce Williams
Home Address: Business Address:
418 Shandon Street 1701 Richland Street
Columbia, SC 29205 Columbia, SC 29201

2. He was born in Columbia, South Carolina on March 13, 1956. He is presently 38 years old.

4. He was married to Sharon Childers on November 17, 1984. He has two children: Elizabeth Margaret, age 6, and Anne Carlisle, age 2.

5. Military Service: No.

6. He attended Wofford College, 1974-1978, B.A.; the University of South Carolina, summers of 1976 and 1977; Cumberland School of Law, Samford University, 1979-1980, transferred to the University of South Carolina; and the University of South Carolina School of Law, 1980-1982, J.D.

8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
He has attended 12 or more hours of Continued Legal Education courses each year. The majority of these hours related to domestic law. Additionally, he has attended 12 hours each year for judicial continuing education credit.

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
1982-present General practice of law with primary emphasis on family law and personal injury law
1991-present Part-time Municipal Judge for Irmo, South Carolina

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell:BV

Printed Page 5258 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - Infrequently
State - Weekly, primarily in Family Court

15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - estimated 35%
Criminal - estimated 5%
Domestic - estimated 60%

16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 5%
Non-Jury - 95%, primarily in Family Court
Sole Counsel

17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) Melvin v. Melvin. Long-term marriage involving issues of contested divorce and equitable distribution including military retirement.
(b) Inman v. Inman. A custody case involving a mother who moved out of state. The mother retained custody, but she had to return to South Carolina.
(c) Oswald v. Oswald. A contested domestic action involving child support, visitation, equitable distribution and attorney fees. The case is significant in that it involved most issues in private domestic actions.
(d) Jackson v. Jackson. A domestic case tried for the mother, seeking custody and visitation, who had in prior years given up custody and visitation with her children. Custody was obtained for mother.
(e) Bullard v. Ehrhardt. 324 S.E.2d 61, 283 S.C. 557 (1984)
This case established duty of store owner to invitees for the criminal actions of third parties in negligence actions.

18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Marvin E. Davis v. Bernice H. Davis.
(b) Oyler v. Oyler. 358 S.E.2d 170, 293 S.C. 4 (S.C. App. 1987)
Participation in this appeal limited to responsibility for oral argument and assisting in writing brief.
(c) Bullard v. Ehrhardt. 324 S.E.2d 61, 283 S.C. 557 (1984)

Printed Page 5259 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
(d) Frances June Rawl v. Roy Edwin Rawl, Sr. Participation limited to oral argument.

20. Judicial Office:
Part-time Municipal Judge; Irmo, South Carolina; October, 1991 to present; appointed by Town Council; jurisdiction limited to magistrate level criminal and traffic offenses

23. Employment As a Judge Other Than Elected Judicial Office:
Same as answer to Question #20

32. Sued: He was named as a defendant creditor in a foreclosure action because of a Family Court Order awarding him attorney fees to be paid by defendant debtor.

35. Lobbyist or Lobbyist Principal:
South Carolina Society of Ophthalmology, 1990
South Carolina Funeral Directors Association, 1990

39. Expenditures Relating to Candidacy:
January 1, 1994 to present:
Stamps $49.59
Stationery $25.20
Telephone $34.34

44. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association, 1982 to Present, Family Law Section Council (1994); South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association, 1991 to present, Chairman of Family Law Section (1993-1994); Richland County Bar Association, 1982 to present (Family Law Committee Chairman, 1993; Family Law Committee, 1991- 1993); Lexington County Bar Association, 1990-1993

45. Civic, charitable, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
St. Mary's Episcopal Church, Vestry (1990-1991); Columbia Kiwanis Club, President (1989-1990), Board of Directors (1987-1991), Key Club, Keywanette Advisor (1983 to present); Summit Club; Wildewood Country Club

46. Individuals who appear in Family Court need to feel that those involved in the system will treat them fairly and with respect.

Printed Page 5260 . . . . . Thursday, April 28, 1994
Litigants may not always agree with decisions in the courtroom, but they should feel that both the Judge and lawyers care about their situation and that efforts have been made to render fair decisions.

| Printed Page 5240, Apr. 28 | Printed Page 5260, Apr. 28 |
Page Finder Index