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