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 6870, May 17 | Printed Page 6890, May 17 |
Printed Page 6880 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. Mr. Alexander, any questions?
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Dillard. The next candidate is J.S. Flynn. Mr. Flynn, if you'd come forward please.
JOHN SARTOR FLYNN, having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Flynn, have you had a chance to review the Personal Data Questionnaire?
MR. FLYNN: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is it correct?
MR. FLYNN: As far as I can determine.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any amendments or changes that need to be made?
MR. FLYNN: No.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have any objection to our making that a part of the record at this point?
MR. FLYNN: No objection.
THE CHAIRMAN: That will be done.

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY

1. J. S. (John Sartor) Flynn
Home Address: Business Address:
217 S. Mountain Street 127 W. Main Street
Union, SC 29379 Union, SC 29379

2. He was born in Union, South Carolina on February 14, 1932. He is presently 62 years old.

4. He was married to Nora Grant Alston on February 23, 1963. He has two children: Alston Flynn Lippert, age 29 (Assistant Professor of Economics at Villanova University, Villanova, PA), and Anne Macon Flynn, age 26 (lawyer at Richardson, Plowden, Grier & Howser, Columbia, SC).

5. Military Service: October 1, 1952 - October 2, 1954; US Army; Sgt. (E-5): RA 14 465 433; Honorable Release by DD-214:October 2, 1954; Honorable Discharge July 20, 1961.

6. He attended the University of South Carolina, 1950-1952 (entered US Army) and 1954-1956, B.S. in Business Administration; and the University of South Carolina Law School, 1955-1958 (Bachelor of Laws), 1970 (Juris Doctor).

Printed Page 6881 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
Since CLE requirements were started, he has met all until he was determined exempt therefrom; and since then he has attended CLE programs sponsored at meetings for solicitors and for county attorneys.

9. Taught or Lectured:
Spring semester 1976, he taught a course in Business Law at USC-Union.

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
General practice of law since 1958 in Union County, South Carolina. During this period of time he served as City Recorder, 1960-1962; Public Defender, 1969-1978; Assistant Solicitor, 1978-1993; and he is presently Union County Attorney.

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell:BV

14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - none
State - at least monthly
Other - none

15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 10
Criminal - 75
Domestic - 15

16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury - 15
Non-jury -85
Sole counsel (although Solicitor exercised the discretion)

17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
He believes that the significance of the cases he has handled in his 35 years of practicing law belongs to his clients individually, but not to society as a whole. Particularly, the cases he has handled regarding the protection of neglected and abused children, and the representation of persons accused of violating criminal laws, are profoundly significant to all individuals involved because their lives

Printed Page 6882 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
are changed by the Court's involvement and decisions. In turn, the increasing number of these cases in the court system and how they are handled is significant to society as a whole.
(a) Stewart v. Stewart (Watts); Union County Judgment Roll:AA- 397.
He represented the Plaintiff who had previously married a North Carolina woman about 50 years prior to this court proceeding. He was still married to her when he participated in a marriage ceremony with the Defendant, with whom he fathered and reared four children, all of whom were emancipated before this action was commenced. Plaintiff divorced the North Carolina woman and continued living with this Defendant, although only sporadically at times, until about 1990 when she married a man named Watts. Plaintiff and Defendant owned one house together, and a second house, used by Plaintiff as his home, was titled only in Defendant, having been conveyed to her by Plaintiff some years previously. Plaintiff and Defendant maintained a joint bank account and filed joint income tax returns through 1989. Defendant wrote Plaintiff and told him to vacate the home because she intended to sell it.
This action to determine the relationship of Plaintiff and Defendant as one of husband and wife under Common Law, for divorce on the ground of separation for over one year, and an equitable division of property, was instituted, and a Lis Pendens was filed concerning both properties. Needless to say, the matter was contested. The Court ruled that a Common Law marriage had been established when the North Carolina woman was divorced, that the property was transmuted into marital property, and that each of the parties was entitled to 50% of the net value of both houses as an equitable division of the marital property.
The significance here is that without taking action, the Plaintiff could have lost all of his possessions and his home.
(b) State v. Unnamed Juvenile; Union County.
The juvenile in this proceeding was alleged to have committed a trespass after notice. The juvenile involved was attempting to get to game preserve land that did not have a decent access to the public road. There were homes in the sparsely settled area that were adjacent to the north of the game preserve lands. The juvenile, with another, went from the public road
Printed Page 6883 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
on a bicycle and passed a "no trespassing" sign and a locked gate onto privately owned lands crossing them to the rear of the dwelling house and approaching the game preserve property when he was accosted by the landowner and resident.
A prosecution was necessary due to the insistence of the homeowner. The juvenile appeared and was represented by appointed counsel, the public defender. At the conclusion of the evidence, the court ruled that the case had been proved against the juvenile beyond reasonable doubt, but the court determined that the best interest of the juvenile and society required that the child be warned that what he had done was a violation of law and that the case would be dismissed with no attendant punishment.
The significance here was that all juveniles who violate the law are not necessarily punished for their indiscretions. This case also demonstrates the importance of the Family Court as a device for warning juveniles and a deterrent to juveniles from committing more serious and more personally harmful acts in the future.
(c) Union County DSS v. Gray, et al.; Union County Judgment Roll:V- 437.
This was a child abuse/neglect matter. Four children, all under ten years of age, were found together but without any responsible person to care for them. They were taken into Emergency Protective Custody by a law enforcement officer and turned over to a child protective service worker with Union County DSS, who put the children in foster care and contacted him as Assistant Solicitor to bring the matter to the attention of Family Court. The action, as do all such, required a Summons, Complaint, Notice of Hearings (Emergency and Removal) as to time and dates, Petition for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem and Attorney for the children, Order appointing someone as Guardian ad Litem, and someone else as attorney for the children, and Notice to parent of right to counsel.
The Emergency Hearing must be held within ten days of the taking of the children, and it was. The purpose of the Emergency Hearing is for the Court to determine whether the law enforcement officer acted appropriately in taking the children into emergency protective custody, and to determine whether the children should be continued in foster care under
Printed Page 6884 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
DSS supervision or returned to the parent pending the Removal Hearing. In this case, the mother appeared without shoes or counsel, and otherwise appeared unconcerned.
The Court ruled that the law enforcement officer acted appropriately, appointed counsel for the mother, and continued custody with DSS until the Removal Hearing, which had already been scheduled for a time within 30 days of the Emergency Hearing.
The primary goal of the Family Court in situations such as this is to determine what the best interests of the children requires and try to see that it is carried out. Such was the significance here.
(d) Union County DSS v. Williams, et al; Union County Judgment Roll: R-5.
This also was a child abuse/neglect matter. The child was under one year of age, and the stepfather of the child broke the leg of the child by twisting it. The matter was reported to DSS by the doctor who treated the child. After the stepfather was confined in prison for what he had done to the child, the mother and child were reunited with assistance from the Court and DSS. This matter, as do all child abuse/neglect matters, involved several persons and more than one court appearance by several attorneys including:
Judges: Wilburn and Mendenhall
Attorneys: J. S. Flynn - DSS
Nora Lewis - Stepfather
Barbara Machell - Natural Mother
Richard Steele - Abused Child
Thomas H. White - Guardian ad Litem for Abused Child
The significance here shows that the court sought the child's best interest, which in this case reunited the child with the mother.
(e) Owings v. Roper; Union County Judgment Roll:W-375.
He became involved in this matter several years after the parties had been divorced. The action was instituted by a Petition for Contempt and a Rule to Show Cause against the mother of a child, age about six years. The Petition alleged the mother was refusing weekday visitation without justification and that she should be required to pay costs and counsel fees and be sanctioned by the court.
Printed Page 6885 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
He represented the mother of the child and procured an Affidavit about the child from the child's teacher and filed on behalf of the mother an Answer, Return to Rule and Counterclaim.
Prior to the time for hearing, the parties, through their respective counsel, negotiated a settlement of their differences with increased child support benefits for the mother, who continued to have custody and with spelled out visitation times, and with each to pay their respective counsel. At the designated time for hearing the agreement was presented to the Court with all present. The Court determined the agreement was fair, just and equitable under the circumstances and adopted it as the Order of the Court.
The significance of this is that sometimes people don't realize they would be better off leaving well enough alone.

18. Five (5) civil appeals:
He has never personally handled a domestic appeal.

20. Judicial Office:
For approximately two years he served as City of Union Recorder with only criminal (minor misdemeanor) jurisdiction of $100 or 30 days.

24. Unsuccessful Candidate:
S. C. House of Representatives, 1960 (came in fourth out of six vying for two seats)
Probate Judge, Union County, 1964
Sixteenth Circuit Solicitor, 1988

25. Occupation, business or profession other than the practice of law:
For about ten years he taught part time at USC-Union. He was allowed to have 8 a.m. classes in Accounting and Economics. This did not interfere with his law practice.

39. Expenditures Relating to Candidacy:
Postage, $58, 3/3/94

44. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association; Union County Bar Association (past President, 1975)

Printed Page 6886 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
45. Civic, charitable, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
Union Rotary Club (past director, Paul Harris Fellow); Masons; Hejaz Shrine; Elks (past Esquire); Grace United Methodist Church (Pastor-Parish Committee, Sunday School teacher, Administrative Board); American Legion; Union Country Club

46. Union County Chamber of Commerce (past President, 1984-1985)

47. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) J. Carlisle Oxner, Jr., Chairman & President
Arthur State Bank
P. O. Drawer 869, Union, SC 29379
427-1213
(b) Larry F. Grant, Esquire
Gatlin Law Firm
P. O. Drawer 964, Rock Hill, SC 29731-6964
327-7171
(c) James M. Arthur, Esquire
P. O. Box 705, Union, SC 29379
427-8662
(d) B. G. (Bob) Waddell, Minister
Grace United Methodist Church
201 South Church Street, Union, SC 29379
427-1266
(e) William L. Ferguson, Esquire
Spencer & Spencer
P. O. Box 790, Rock Hill, SC 29731-6790
327-7191

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE - ADDENDUM

2. Positions on the Bench:
City of Union Recorder's Court; 11-14-60 to 6-29-62
This was part-time employment; the jurisdiction was only criminal, with maximum punishment of $100 or 30 days.

10. Extra-Judicial Community Involvement:
He has been actively involved with community matters for a long time, but he has never used any job to further his interests. If the community benefitted, it was good.

Printed Page 6887 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline reports no formal complaints or charges of any kind. The Judicial Standards Commission has no record of reprimands against you in your former capacity as City Recorder. The records of the applicable law enforcement agencies:Union County Sheriff's, Union City Police, SLED and FBI are all negative. The Judgement Rolls of Union County are all negative. The Federal Court records are negative as well. We have no complainants who are here to testify against you. There are no witnesses that have asked to be heard in your case.

At this time, you have the opportunity, if you choose, to either make an opening statement or we allow the candidates, if they wish, to have some statement regarding their candidacy entered into the record. They can reduce that to writing and provide that to us in a reasonable period of time after this hearing. So you've got that opportunity, if you so choose.
MR. FLYNN: I choose the latter.
THE CHAIRMAN: So if you will in the next few days, if you can, if you have something you'd like for us to reduce to writing included in the record, we'll be happy to do it.
MR. FLYNN: Thank you.

STATEMENT OF MR. FLYNN:

Please let this written statement accompany my testimony given on Wednesday morning, 4/27/94.

My name is John S. Flynn, but I prefer Jack. I am a lifelong resident of Union County where I have maintained a law office and an active practice for over 35 years, which included extensive work in the Family Court since its inception in 1977. My experience includes having been involved in juvenile and child abuse matters both as Public Defender and as Assistant Solicitor, and domestic matters as private counsel.

My family includes my wife, Nonie, and our two grown daughters.

I am a member of the S. C. Bar, and am a past president of the Union County Bar Association. I am active in Grace United Methodist Church, its Pastor- Parish Committee, and Mens' Sunday School Class where I am one of its teachers. I am also involved in my community with memberships including Rotary, Masons, Shrine, Elks, Country Club and American Legion.

My experience includes 2 years in the U. S. Army, and 3 years in the 412th Military Government Group Active Reserve; 35 years active law practice in Union County; City Judge; Public Defender; Assistant Solicitor; County Attorney; Instructor of USC-Union; and former President of the Chamber of Commerce.

Printed Page 6888 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
I believe that I have the experience, the ability and the maturity to handle the responsibilities of a Judgeship in the Family Court System.

Thank you for your kindness in this matter.

Yours very truly,
/s/John Sartor Flynn

THE CHAIRMAN: At this time, I'll turn you over to Ms. McNamee for questioning.
MR. FLYNN - EXAMINATION BY MS. MCNAMEE:
Q. Good morning, Mr. Flynn.
A. Good morning.
Q. Mr. Flynn, you've been a lawyer for 35 distinguished years, I understand?
A. Yes, thank you.
Q. And you have been, as I understand it, a general practitioner and a solicitor?
A. I have been -- I have maintained a general practice of law for over 35 years. During that 35 years for about a year and a half to two years, I was City Recorder for the City of Union; for several years, I was public defender in Union County; for 15 years, I was an assistant solicitor, and now I'm the County Attorney for Union County.
Q. Is being the County Attorney for Union County a full-time job?
A. No, ma'am.
Q. Approximately how much of your workday is -- or workweek is that part?
A. Not very much. It varies. Sometimes it would take a little more time than others. It's depending on what -- what's in the works.
Q. You say that you are in court on a monthly basis; is that correct?
A. Well, I think the way I interpreted that question was over the past five years -- and I don't go to court much anymore. I go some, but I don't look for work and I go when I'm called and I take -- I limit the cases that I take. I take the ones that interest me.
Q. What kinds of cases are those usually?
A. Different types. I expect most of them are Family Court.
Q. Like what kinds of Family Court cases, sir?
A. I gave reference to the -- the first one that I gave was the Stewart case. And I -- that case interested me and I got involved in it.
Q. What year was that, sir?
A. It started in '92, I believe.

Printed Page 6889 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
Q. So it's a very recent case?
A. Yes, ma'am, that was my most recent -- well, one of my more recent ones.
Q. I see. All right. I guess you said it was 15 -- you did 15 percent of your work was domestic work; is that correct?
A. That is just out of the air. I figured again for the last five years about 15 percent.
Q. How many of those cases are contested cases?
A. In family court?
Q. Yes, sir.
A. Probably about all of them.
Q. Uh-huh.
A. I guess maybe not all of them. Maybe 85 percent.
Q. Have you handled cases that involve equitable distribution of marital property?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And then also the distribution or the division of the retirement benefits?
A. I have not been involved in one of those. I intend to go to the seminar, I believe, it's May the 6th or May the 5th, whenever. It's the first week of May that has that on the agenda.
Q. I see.
A. That I find that that may be something that would be interesting to find out about.
Q. Have you handled child custody cases?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. How many in the last year?
A. In the last year?
Q. Yes, sir.
A. I don't know that I've been in a contested child custody case in the last year.
Q. Okay.
A. If I had, it would only probably be -- well, no, I think I -- I handled one recently, very recently. And it was determined at the temporary hearing, so then the matter was settled and my client ended up with custody.
Q. Did that case also involve child support guidelines?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Are you then familiar with them?
A. Yes, ma'am. I don't ever compute them according to the way other people do, but I get within the dollar range very close. I use the form.

| Printed Page 6870, May 17 | Printed Page 6890, May 17 |
Page Finder Index