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 6920, May 17 | Printed Page 6940, May 17 |
Printed Page 6930 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
Q. Have you ever been the subject of a disciplinary action as a state employee?
A. No.
Q. That's all the questions I have, Mr. Chairman.
REPRESENTATIVE BEATTY: Just one question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Representative Beatty.
EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE BEATTY:
Q. Looking to your employment history, it appears that you have spent most of your legal life defending the governmental decisions. Do you feel you can be fair to folk on the other side?
A. Yes, I do. And I've had words from time to time with some of my government lawyers colleagues because some of them are a little more inclined to view the agencies as just doing the Lord's work. I think that that's the way for them to feel and they should and they should do their work like that's what it is. But I've always been conscious that the general public interest might well lie somewhere else, not withstanding the part I might have to play in particular proceedings and, frankly, I've been able to do my job pretty much cognizant of that.

I've been lucky enough not to be put in situations where I had to take an agency's side and advance an agency's interest in circumstances that I thought were clearly inconsistent with the general public interest. I'm aware that that's a luxury not every public servant has experienced.
THE CHAIRMAN: Other questions? Senator Russell.
EXAMINATION BY SENATOR RUSSELL:
Q. Just one simple scenario. You've finished your hearing
-- this is assuming that you have concluded your hearing and the attorneys that appear before you one or both or all, if more, came to you and invited you to lunch, what would you do?
A. The easiest thing to do, and any time you have to think about it, you ought to say no. It would be easy for me just to say no, thank you and just not go with them.

Trying to figure out whether everybody is involved and if I pay for my own, everything would be okay or something like that, to me, would kill too many brain cells in an unworthy cause. It's just easier to have -- a judge doesn't have to be a hermit, but a judge shouldn't be looking for something to fly up and hit him in the face. He shouldn't invite it.

It can make you a lonely person, but like the Canons or the commentary to the Canons clearly puts forth, there are certain ascriptions put on your conduct that an ordinary person in any other walk of life would justly bridle at, but it's part of being a judge and if you don't understand that, you really shouldn't apply.

Printed Page 6931 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
Q. Are you a golfer?
A. No.
Q. I don't need to ask the next one.
THE CHAIRMAN: Further questions? If not, thank you, Mr. Carruth.
A. Thank you.

END OF PRIOR TESTIMONY OF MR. CARRUTH.

REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: All right. John D. Geathers. Mr. Geathers, would you please raise your right hand.
JOHN D. GEATHERS, having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Have you had a chance to review the Personal Data Questionnaire Summary?
MR. GEATHERS: Yes, sir.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Is it correct?
MR. GEATHERS: Yes, sir.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Does anything need clarification?
MR. GEATHERS: No, sir.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Is there any objection to our making this Summary a part of the record of your sworn testimony?
MR. GEATHERS: No, sir.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: It shall be done at this point in the transcript.

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY

1. John D. Geathers
Home Address: Business Address:
P. O. Box 3221 Office of Senate Research
Columbia, SC 29230 P. O. Box 142
Columbia, SC 29202

2. He was born in Georgetown, South Carolina on April 10, 1961. He is presently 33 years old.

4. He was married to Doris Williams on September 12, 1987. He has one child: Lydia Kaden, age 8 1/2 months.

5. Military Service: N/A

Printed Page 6932 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
6. He attended the University of South Carolina, B.A. Degree in Political Science, 1979-1983; and the University of South Carolina School of Law, 1983-1986, J.D. Degree.

8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
He has complied with the requisite CLE hours as prescribed by the South Carolina Bar Association.

9. Taught or Lectured: He has had the opportunity to prepare materials and give an update on the 1991 Solid Waste Management Act to the government section at the 1991 Annual Bar Meeting.

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
Attorney for the Department of Labor; September, 1986 - January, 1987
Responsibilities: Resolved cases involving large and small corporations and businesses in violation of Occupational Safety and Health standards.
Attorney for the Office of Senate Research; 1987 - present
Responsibilities: Researching and writing memoranda of law; drafting legislation; staffing committee meetings; advising Senators; supervising law clerks; serving as Senate Staff appointee to the Southern Legislative Conference on Environmental Quality and Natural Resources Committee; experience with federal environmental laws.

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell:Inapplicable

14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal -
State -
Other -
None.

15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil -
Criminal -
Domestic -
Inapplicable. However, during his experience with the Senate, he has had an opportunity to work on projects involving each of these subject areas.

Printed Page 6933 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:
Jury -
Non-jury -
Inapplicable.

17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
Inapplicable.

18. Five (5) civil appeals:
Inapplicable.

39. Expenditures Relating to Candidacy:
Postage: $ 36.00
Stationery: $ 80.00

44. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association; North Carolina Bar Association

45. Civic, charitable, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
United Way Big Brothers Volunteer

46. STATEMENT BY JOHN D. GEATHERS:"As a candidate for a position as an Administrative Law Judge, I want the Committee to know a few of the following things about me. My wife Doris and I have been married just over six years and are the proud parents of Lydia Kaden who is nearly nine months old. I graduated with honors from a defacto segregated public high school in Georgetown County. My parents do not have a formal education, but they have always been people who have worked hard and have understood the importance of an education in today's society. They have put three children through the University of South Carolina and now have a fourth in college. They instilled within me a work ethic. As a teenager, I worked in the tobacco fields of Georgetown and the surrounding counties. I also worked in Myrtle Beach restaurants washing dishes and busing tables to earn money for upcoming school terms. I was told and taught that people may often help you but rarely do they give you anything. My parents instilled Christian values in me and taught me to live by certain virtues including integrity (which meant doing the right thing even when no one else was looking or no one would find out) and striving for honesty in all

Printed Page 6934 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
my dealings. They taught me to respect other people regardless of the status or station those people had in life.
These virtues carried me through the University of South Carolina undergraduate program and the School of Law and they continue to direct me in my professional career. I entered the University of South Carolina in 1979 and graduated in 1983 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science. During my studies at the University of South Carolina, I made the Dean's List many of the semesters of my attendance. I was inducted into the Phi Sigma Alpha Honorary Political Science Society. I was selected through competitive application process as a governmental intern to serve in Lieutenant Governor Nancy Stevenson's office where I had occasion to meet my current employer Frank Caggiano, Clerk of the South Carolina Senate.
I entered law school in 1983 and graduated in 1986 with a Juris Doctor degree and was admitted to the South Carolina Bar that same year. During that year I became employed with the South Carolina Department of Labor as a staff attorney. My responsibilities involved contested case resolution concerning large and small corporations and businesses alleged to be in violation of Occupational, Safety, and Health Standards.
My tenure at the Department of Labor was short lived as Frank Caggiano of the Senate invited me to work as a full time staff attorney for the Office of Senate Research, where I had previously clerked during law school.
I currently serve as Senior Staff Counsel for the Office of Senate Research. I have served continuously in this position since 1987. My responsibilities include, among other things, researching and writing memoranda of law, drafting legislation, staffing committee meetings, advising Senators, supervising law clerks, and serving as Senate staff appointee to the Southern Legislative Conference on Environmental Quality and Natural Resource Committee. I have had the opportunity to serve as Senate point person on a number of pivotal issues confronting the General Assembly. Chief among these issues were the following:
Infectious Waste Management Act of 1989, Act No. 134. Prior to the passage of this act, the Senate sent Senator Peden McLeod, myself, and another staff person to a seminar in Boston, Massachusetts, to familiarize ourselves with all of the issues concerning the management of infectious waste. As you will recall, there was public concern over infectious waste as many hypodermic
Printed Page 6935 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
needles were found floating on beaches across the country. This act promoted the proper handling, treatment and disposal of infectious waste.
Hazardous Waste Landfill Restrictions Act of 1990, Act No. 590, in which the General Assembly attempted to reduce the amount of hazardous waste landfilled in South Carolina.
The Solid Waste Management Act of 1991, Act No. 63, which established a coordinated statewide solid waste program in order to protect public health and safety, protect and preserve the quality of the environment, conserve and recycle natural resources, and to promote reduction and recycling goals for solid waste being received at municipal solid waste landfills and solid waste incinerators in the State of South Carolina.
The Offender Management System Act of 1992, Act No. 461. This act sought to identify qualified non-violent offenders and place them in communities in controlled settings in order to alleviate prison overcrowding.
Barnwell Low-Level Radioactive Waste Site Act of 1992. This act extended the operation of the Barnwell Low Level Radioactive Waste site for the Southeast Interstate Compact until January 1, 1996, subject to a number of conditions.
And most recently, the Restructuring Act of 1993, Act No. 181 in which state government was restructured by the consolidation of numerous agencies, boards, and commissions into 19 departments within the executive branch of state government. I was one of two Senate staff persons appointed to study and draft the changes necessary for the consolidation of the environmental agencies.
On all of these legislative enactments, I worked closely with the sponsors of the legislation and with various interest groups and state agencies in reaching compromises and composing amendments. I also served as staff to the Conference Committees in forging compromises between the House and Senate.
These tasks required long and arduous work hours on many occasions. I am accustomed to working at a job until it is done right and I am very aware of the need to give due consideration to all sides of an issue. I feel these are important qualities for a judge, particularly in the administrative law area where so many interests are affected. On some occasions these tasks required that I work independently and on other occasions that I provide supervision of support staff.
Printed Page 6936 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
I chronicle or detail my work at the Senate to merely indicate that I have gained the respect and admiration, if not of all, of many of the Senators for competence, diligence, and devotion to excellence. This is evidenced by Senator Moore in the Senate Journal on Tuesday, May 14, 1991, who commended me for my work on the Solid Waste Bill:"Senator Moore asked that the record reflect that he paid special tribute to the efforts and support of Mr. John Geathers, Senior Staff Counsel, with the Office of Senate Research." Most recently, with the Restructuring Bill, along with other members of the Senate staff, I was commended for my efforts in working very diligent and long hours and in a short period of time producing a quality work product. This bill was over 1200 pages. Again, Senator Marshall Williams, Senate President Pro Tempore, appointed me to serve as Senate staff appointee to the Southern Legislative Conference on Environmental Quality and Natural Resources Committee.
I would also like the Committee to know that on my own initiative, I became a member of the North Carolina Bar Association in 1992. I ordered the study materials and studied during the evening after work. And I should mention this was during the Barnwell debate, so many nights I was studying until midnight for the bar exam. This was not always a pleasant experience but I wanted to achieve my goal. North Carolina currently has jurisdictional reciprocity with 23 other states and I saw this as an avenue to broaden my career options given the interstate nature of many legal questions.
The last seven years as Senior Staff Counsel for the Office of Senate Research and my tenure as an attorney for the OSHA Division of the South Carolina Department of Labor have prepared me, for all of the various reasons I have indicated, to serve as an Administrative Law Judge, along with my familiarity with the Administrative Procedures Act. Recently, I have further prepared myself by studying and outlining the most current and comprehensive materials on South Carolina administrative law.
I have prided myself on being able and committed to working hard and presenting myself as a person of integrity and as a person qualified on his merits. I look to the perseverance, determination and achievement of my predecessors and forefathers as inspiration and incentive to advance myself and build upon my heritage. In offering for the position as Administrative Law Judge, I respectfully request that the Committee consider my entire record and background. I offer myself as a qualified candidate, regardless of race, gender,
Printed Page 6937 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
political philosophy or affiliation, who will do a job that the General Assembly, the State and my family can be proud of."

47. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Joseph H. Stone, Assistant Vice President
Nationsbank
2095 Beltline Boulevard, Columbia, SC 29204
765-4940
(b) Frank Caggiano
Clerk of the Senate
P. O. Box 142, Columbia, SC 29202
734-2806
(c) Carl E. Lancaster
Northeast Church of Christ
3506 Edwards Road, Taylors, SC 29687
244-7622
(d) Christopher G. Isgett, Esquire
P. O. Box 1505, Columbia, SC 29202
799-9811
(e) Hogan Brown
Assistant Clerk of the Senate
P. O. Box 142, Columbia, SC 29202
734-2774

The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline reports that no formal complaints or charges of any kind have ever been filed against you. The records of the applicable law enforcement agencies:Richland County Sheriff's Department are negative; Columbia City Police Department are negative; SLED and FBI records are negative. The Judgment Rolls of Richland County are negative. Federal court records are negative. No complaints or statements were received. No witnesses are present to testify. Would you care to make a statement before you ask counsel to question you.
MR. GEATHERS: I don't have a verbal statement. I do have a written statement, the same statement that I submitted the last time.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: All right. Would the Page please get that for us. All right. Proceed, please.
MR. ELLIOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. GEATHERS - EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIOTT:
Q. Good afternoon.
A. Good afternoon.

Printed Page 6938 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
Q. What will be your bright line test about gifts and social hospitality?
A. I do not intend to accept any gifts from any lawyers who would likely appear before me in an administrative proceeding. Of course, if -- I do have certain friends naturally who are lawyers, a long-standing friendships and I would continue to accept gifts from them, of course, if they were not likely to appear before me. And even if they were likely to appear before me, I would probably recuse myself.
Q. Among those attorneys who might appear before you, what would you call a gift?
A. Anything of value.
Q. What would be your rule about recusal?
A. Well, pretty much as it's outlined in Canon 3. As far as impartiality when it relates to relatives, you would have to note that on the record and, of course, you would be able to remit that as provided there. Or in a financial type situation where you have some financial interest, that's subject to remittal. Otherwise, of course, there are instances in which one could not -- a judge in that situation could not recuse -- remit himself -- remit that disqualification and, therefore, you should recuse yourself.
Q. As an administrative law judge, there will be occasions when the nonagency party will not be represented by an attorney and there might be that occasion where they come to you and they're kind of lost about what's going on and they come to you in chambers and they say, "What do I do? How do I proceed?" How will you handle that?
A. I think you have to, as the saying goes, nip it in the bud in the sense that you inform that party that you're not allowed to communicate with him while the other side is not present and inform that individual that he or she may wish to seek legal counsel and leave it at that.
Q. Besides the change in your daughter's age, is there anything --
A. She's still growing and getting older.
Q. What, five months?
A. Ten months now.
Q. Five months older?
A. Yes.
Q. Have there been any changes in your status or anything of that nature that the committee might need to know about?
A. Not that I'm aware of.
Q. Have you sought the pledge of a legislator prior to this screening?
A. No, I have not.
Q. Even if that -- if conditioned upon your further advancement through the screening process?
A. That's correct.
Printed Page 6939 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
Q. And do you know of any solicitation or pledges on your behalf?
A. No, I do not.
Q. Our records, and correct me if I'm wrong, but our records show that you have filed with us and you do have some expenditures --
A. Yes.
Q. -- that meet the threshold where you need to file with the Senate and House Ethics Committees and I don't -- our records don't show that you've filed there.
A. I intend to. As I did file with those particular committees last time and I intend to file this time as well.
Q. Thank you.
MR. ELLIOTT: That's all the questions I have, Mr. Chairman.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Thank you, sir. I don't have any questions.
A. Thank you.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: You can stay with us or you're free to leave, whatever you choose.
A. Thank you.

TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONY OF MR. GEATHERS AT PUBLIC HEARING OF JANUARY 13, 1994:

MR. GEATHERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I do have a brief statement. The role of the judge is special, whether it be at the lowest level of adjudication or in the highest court of our state deciding issues of great moment. It is special because a public trust has been imparted to the one holding the office of judge. What society and this committee and the General Assembly expect and at a minimum deserve from one who holds the office is integrity, competence and diligence. Not only do I humbly submit that I am qualified on these points, but I would call the committee's attention to my specific work experiences which indicate the aforementioned qualities.

I have worked in the Office of Senate Research for over seven years as senior staff counsel and daily researching and writing memoranda of law on a multiplicity of issues. I'm responsible for researching and drafting legislation, staffing standing committee and conference committee meetings and supervising certain support staff.

I have been the Senate point person on a number of pivotal issues which have come before the General Assembly. Chief among these were the Infectious Waste Management Act of 1989, the Hazardous Waste Landfill Act of 1990, the Solid Waste Management Act of 1991, the Offender

Printed Page 6940 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994
Management Act of 1992, the Barnwell Low Level Radioactive Waste Site Act of 1992, and natural resources and environmental components of the Restructuring Act of 1993. And more specifically, to prepare myself to assume the position of administrative law judge, I have reviewed and outlined Professor Shipley's treatise on administrative law. I have revisited an outline of Professor Reizer's fifth edition on Rules of Evidence in South Carolina.

| Printed Page 6920, May 17 | Printed Page 6940, May 17 |
Page Finder Index