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 6980, May 17 | Printed Page 7000, May 17 |

Printed Page 6990 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

If I ever thought that what I was handling in terms of my court case would in any way impart any type of impartiality on what I was doing, I would recuse myself. There would be no question.
Q. You have a -- you've lived in Spartanburg for quite a long time now. Does it matter to you that the office of the ALJs would be down here in Columbia? How will you handle that?
A. It does not matter to me.
Q. Will you be down here?
A. Certainly. I'll be wherever I'm sent.
Q. Do you have any tax liens or any other indications of financial trouble?
A. No, ma'am. I do not.
Q. What do you do presently when lawyer legislators appear before you --
A. In terms of what?
Q. -- in Magistrate's Court? Well, I guess --
A. Do I pay them deference, is that the question?
Q. Well --
A. No. No.
Q. Does anything different happen?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. Has it happened? Have you had them?
A. I'll tell you what, when I came there -- there was such a lax atmosphere. The police officers would come back behind our panels and they would sit and chat with our staff and it appalled me because I think this appearance of impropriety is absolutely integral to having people respect the judiciary and so I asked that they remove themselves.

I pay absolutely no preference to any person regardless of their position, regardless of their color, regardless of their sex. I think that every person needs to be treated exactly the same.
Q. Have you ever been found in contempt by a court? Would you go into that quickly.
A. Sure. My second year of private practice, I tried a case before Judge Mendell Rivers. There was at that point a Family judge that had an edict that said if you exceeded 30 minutes, you were to request a pretrial. I went over four minutes. It was 34 minutes and 22 seconds, I believe and, I was cited for contempt.


Printed Page 6991 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

It was brought to the Supreme Court and it was vacated and in the Supreme Court order, Justice Toal said that you could not adjudicate on a time clock and that it was overly broad and unfair.
Q. Not only did they vacate it, but they sort of created a standard there --
A. There was -- yes, ma'am. There was found to be no wilfulness in it and, frankly, it was -- I think it was an interesting experience.
Q. Especially a couple of years out of law school?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you ever been the subject of a disciplinary action arising out of any public employment?
A. No. I believe this is in the packet and it didn't come out. I was a little surprised in the packet that was -- or what was read initially. There was one gentleman that brought a grievance against me particularly -- specifically against me as a judge.

The case was one where he was suing for malicious prosecution against another person and the -- it was dismissed. They said that there was no merit to it. That it was a legal issue that he had and he never appealed, but that was brought and it was never documented by the Supreme Court.
A. Or by Court Administration, excuse me.
THE CHAIRMAN: Questions from the Members? Senator McConnell.
EXAMINATION BY SENATOR MCCONNELL:
Q. Have you ever heard of the term Robitis?
A. Robitis?
Q. It's where the robes on a judge become so heavy, it scrambles their brains and --
A. Yes, sir, I actually have heard of that term. Chief Justice Harwell uses it. He says heavy of robe.
Q. Based on that experience you had, it sounds like to me, you've been a victim of it.
A. I can tell you this, I think the best way to treat people very well is to be beaten up yourself. I hate to say it, but I believe that. I think had I not had the experiences that I had, perhaps I would not try so hard to be as clean as I can be.
Q. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Other questions? Mr. Alexander.
EXAMINATION BY REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER:
Q. I notice from your resume, you were in private practice prior to becoming a magistrate?
A. Yes, sir.


Printed Page 6992 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

Q. I'm really interested and I'm not criticizing magistrates, but let me say that up front, but how did you decide to leave a private practice to become a magistrate? I'd like to know that.
A. When I was approached the first time, I laughed. Literally, I laughed. I laughed. And I went back to my office and I began thinking about it and perhaps it's not very wise to say this, but I have always wanted to be a judge.

That's just something -- I think each person has a characteristic or a trait or something that we feel very comfortable with. Some people it's a very traditional home life, some people it's -- I don't know. This was something that I really, really felt comfortable with and -- or wanted to do and I knew likewise that the Magistrate's Court had some problems and it was a challenge. And I thought it would be a new challenge to see if it would -- if it could work.
Q. Have you been happy with the work?
A. Yes, sir, I have. We have -- and I say this not lightly, we have a great group of people. We have four full-time magistrates and eight part-time magistrates. And they are a very, very solid group of people and I can -- there is one thing I'm really proud of, they're just a really great group of people and they've bonded and they work well together.
Q. Would they hate to lose you?
A. I'd hate to lose -- there is a part of me frankly, and I don't know if I'm going to be given that opportunity, sir, but there is a part of me that's a little sad actually, yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Senator Russell.
EXAMINATION BY SENATOR RUSSELL:
Q. Judge Kanes, you have just concluded a hearing and one of the attorneys that appeared before you asked you to go to lunch with him, how would you react to that?
A. I don't go to lunch, sir.
Q. What about if it was a friend that you had known for a long time?
A. If it was a nonattorney and they were in town then I would, but I never eat lunch with attorneys.
Q. But you do eat lunch?
A. I --
Q. To correct your statement you never eat lunch?
A. If it was -- Senator Russell, if it was someone from out of town that called in and said, "Karen, I'm coming into town, do you want to go to lunch?" And it didn't conflict, sure, I would, but I really don't as a practice eat with my colleagues.


Printed Page 6993 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

And that's not to say I don't have friends on the Bar, because I do. I'm crazy about the Spartanburg Bar. I just as a practice don't eat lunch. It takes a very, very special occasion for me to go to lunch with people.
THE CHAIRMAN: Judge, what's the biggest challenge you think the administrative -- the panel of three that we elect of administrative law judges will face in the first 60 days of its practice?
A. I think it's twofold. I think everything that can work effectively revolves around money and I think the first thing that has to be decided is where and how much funding is going to be granted.

I understand the positions themselves have been funded, but I think a lot -- you have to know what your base is in order to start creating something. Secondly, whoever leads this is going to have to be very, very good at molding people because I think if it's not done properly, it will be fragmented and if there is a fragmentation from the onset, I don't know how successful this can be.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Other questions from the members? Thank you, Judge.

END OF PRIOR TESTIMONY OF MS. KANES.

REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Next is Tripp Anderson. That's good. Right there.
RALPH K."TRIPP" ANDERSON, III, having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Have you had a chance to review your Personal Data Questionnaire?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir, I have.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Is it correct?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir. There is one minor change.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Okay.
MR. ANDERSON: And one of the minor jobs that I had was prosecutor for the Medical Board. The Medical Board now comes under the auspices and jurisdiction of the LLR, Labor, Licensing and Regulation Board now. So the Attorney General's office is not having part of the staff doing the prosecutions, although I am acting as a hearing officer on occasions now. So I've gone from being prosecutor to being advisor.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Is there any objection to making this Summary and what you just added a part of the record of your sworn testimony?
MR. ANDERSON: No, sir.


Printed Page 6994 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: It shall be done at this point in the transcript then.

PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE SUMMARY

1. Ralph K. "Tripp" Anderson, III
Home Address: Business Address:
321 Fallen Oak Drive P. O. Box 11549
Columbia, SC 29223 Columbia, SC 29211

2. He was born in Florence, South Carolina on October 13, 1959. He is presently 34 years old.

4. He is married to Janet LeVeque Anderson. He has no children.

5. Military Service: N/A

6. He attended Francis Marion College, August, 1976 to August, 1980; Bachelor of Science; and the University of South Carolina School of Law, August, 1981 to May, 1984, J.D.

8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
In the past five years, he has focused his continuing legal education on trial advocacy, administrative law and criminal law.

9. Taught or Lectured:
S.C. Bar CLE - "Hiring and Firing" (lectured on employment law)
S.C. Bar CLE - "Ethics Act" (lectured on the Ethics Act)
Instructed the Supreme Court legal staff on the Ethics Act (January 5, 1993)

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
When he began working at the Attorney General's Office, his responsibilities encompassed the full-time extradition functions in the Criminal Division.
In time, and at his request, he was given additional work and transferred to the Prosecution Section, where he handled prosecution duties as well as his extradition duties. Thereafter, he also took on the responsibility as Counsel to The Ethics Commission.


Printed Page 6995 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

With the passage of the Statewide Grand Jury Act, he occupied two offices, one in the Prosecution Section and one in the Statewide Grand Jury Section.
Afterwards, he left the Grand Jury Section to return to the Government and Civil Litigation Division/Prosecution Section, where he presently performs the following duties:
(1) Criminal Prosecution
(2) Counsel to the Ethics Commission
(3) Committee Attorney for the State Employee Grievance Committee
(4) Extradition
(5) Prosecutor for the Engineering and Land Surveyor's Board
(6) Medical Board Prosecutions, Attorney (General Opinions and Criminal Appeals, on occasion)

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell:He does not know if he is listed in Martindale-Hubbell. He has never requested to be evaluated by Martindale-Hubbell since he is a state employee.

14. Frequency of appearances in court:
Federal - none
State - 20 times a year
Other -

15. Percentage of litigation:
Civil - 75%
Criminal - 25%
Domestic - None

16. Percentage of cases in trial courts:\
Jury - 25%
Non-jury -75%
Chief Counsel

17. Five (5) of the most significant litigated matters in either trial or appellate court:
(a) State v. Dwight L. Bennett. This was a felony DUI case in which the victim suffered horrible physical injuries and lost the baby she was carrying. This case was used as an example as to the need to increase felony DUI punishment.


Printed Page 6996 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

(b) Georgia v. Richard Daniel Starrett - a'ffd., Richard Daniel Starrett v. William C. Wallace. Starrett was convicted of several heinous crimes in South Carolina. Afterwards, George sought his extradition in an attempt to convict him under the death penalty. Starrett challenged the Attorney General's Office authority to hold extradition hearings.
(c) State v. Michael Goings. Goings was a Cayce police officer charged with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature.
(d) State v. Herbert Pearson and Terrance Singleton. The Defendants in this case were accomplices in the armed robbery, attempted murder and murder of attendants at an Exxon station.
(e) State v. William Keith Victor. After the Defendant was convicted of murder and kidnapping, he was given the death penalty. His case was later reversed on appeal and sent to the Attorney General's Office. This prosecution, under difficult circumstances, resulted in the Defendant's plea to murder and the aggravating circumstances of kidnapping.

18. Five (5) civil appeals:
(a) Bergin Moses Mosteller v. James R. Metts
(b) Dennis G. Mitchell v. State of SC
(c) Ex Parte, Bobby M. Stichert v. Carroll Heath
(d) Patrick C. Lynn, et al. v. State of SC
(e) Paul David Tasker v. M. L. Brown, Jr.

22. Public Office: Assistant Attorney General since 1985.

24. Unsuccessful Candidate: Administrative Law Judge, Seat #3, February 23, 1993

23. Employment As a Judge Other Than Elected Judicial Office:
State Employee Grievance Committee Attorney (quasi-judicial). Since 1989, he has served as a committee attorney for the State Employee Grievance Committee. Section 8-17-340, S.C. Code Ann. (1976) provides that "The committee attorney shall determine the order and relevance of the testimony and the appearance of witnesses, and shall rule on all motions and all legal issues. The parties shall be bound by the decisions of the . . . committee attorney insofar as such hearings are concerned.


Printed Page 6997 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

25. Occupation, business or profession other than the practice of law:
Self-employed salesman - March 26, 1980 to August, 1980
Florence School District #1 - Summers (1973-1975)

39. Expenditures Relating to Candidacy:
Currently, no expenditures have been made.

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

45. Civic, charitable, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
S. C. Policy Review Committee for S. C. Vocational Rehabilitation

46. Although he lives and works in Columbia, for demographic purposes, he is running as a resident of Florence County.

47. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Jack Montgomery, Vice President/City Executive
First Union National Bank
P. O. Box 728, Columbia, SC 29202
251-4449
(b) Richard C. Jones, Esquire
Jones & Seth
P. O. Box 1268, Sumter, SC 29151-1268
778-1006
(c) John R. Lincoln, Pastor
Shandon Baptist Church
819 Woodrow Street, Columbia, SC 29205
799-0652
(d) Gary R. Baker, Executive Director
State Ethics Commission
P. O. Box 11926, Columbia, SC 29211
253-4192
(e) Donald J. Zelenka
Chief Deputy Attorney General
P. O. Box 11549, Columbia, SC 29211
734-3660

The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline reports no formal complaints or charges of any kind have ever been filed against you. The records of the applicable enforcement agencies -- let's see, we have


Printed Page 6998 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

a note here that Mr. Anderson lives in Columbia, but claims Florence as his legal residence. Both counties and cities have been checked. Richland and Florence County Sheriff's Office are negative. Columbia and Florence City Police Department are negative. SLED and FBI records are negative. The Judgement Rolls of Richland and Florence County are negative. Federal court records are negative. No complaints or statements were received. No witnesses are present to testify. Do you care to make any other statement before we proceed?
MR. ANDERSON: No. I waive making a statement.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Thank you, sir. Sue.
MR. ANDERSON - EXAMINATION BY MS. MCNAMEE:
Q. Hello, Mr. Anderson.
A. Hello.
Q. Aside from your statement about the Medical Board, is there anything else or any other changes in your status that you think this committee ought to know about?
A. No. None.
Q. We show a filing -- actually, it was in February with the Ethics Committees of the House and the Senate and none with us. Is that -- it was a minimal amount, $6?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you expended any more money on this campaign?
A. I haven't expended any money on this particular race.
Q. Uh-huh.
A. For Seat 6.
Q. And when you do, you will file it with Ms. Satterwhite?
A. Yes.
Q. Thank you.
A. I certainly will.
Q. Have you sought the pledge of a legislator prior to completion of this screening?
A. No, I haven't.
Q. Have you authorized anyone else to solicit or seek a pledge of a legislator's vote on your behalf?
A. No, I haven't.
Q. Do you know of any other pledges?
A. No.
Q. Or any solicitation or pledges?
A. As Ms. Kanes stated earlier, I certainly think that I have support and the people will support me in this race, but no one that I know of has sought a commitment or a pledge of any kind.

Printed Page 6999 . . . . . Tuesday, May 17, 1994

Q. Is there anything else that you would like to tell us?
A. No.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Do you have a question, Senator?
SENATOR RUSSELL: That's all right.
REPRESENTATIVE ALEXANDER: Thank you so much, Tripp.
A. Thank you very much.

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

MR. ANDERSON - EXAMINATION BY MS. MCNAMEE:
Q. Mr. Anderson, this is not a trick question or anything, but who is your role model for a judge who has good judicial temperament, because at least one person will be reading this transcript?
A. I think the obvious answer would be my father, but there is another and I'll address him, and that's John Hamilton Smith. I have a lot of respect for him, his temperament. He's a fair judge who is erudite on the law and I was always impressed by him.
Q. What are the particular qualities that you think an administrative law judge needs to have?
A. Senator Jennings wrote an article on administrative law judges in the, I think it was the South Carolina Trial Lawyers, and in there he described the driving force behind the Administrative Law Division and its enactment, was the need for professionalism, consistency in the rulings and efficiency, the perception of impartiality and independence, and the final one was actual fairness.

And I thought that encompasses real well the need of what an administrative law judge -- of what an administrative law judge needs to be. But it also has, I think, an interesting intellectual type of approach to the way he used each one of those words and what they really mean.
Q. You have, with the Attorney General's Office, been responsible for working with the Ethics Commission; isn't that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. What is your administrative law experience in the AG's office?
A. As counsel for the Ethics Commission would be one, and I've also been a prosecutor for the medical board cases, for engineering and land surveying board cases. I'm the Governor's Extradition Hearing Officer and I'm the committee attorney for employee grievance hearings.


| Printed Page 6980, May 17 | Printed Page 7000, May 17 |

Page Finder Index