1995 Permanent House Journal Printed Pages 3740-3750 - South Carolina Legislature Online

Journal of the House of Representatives
of the First Session of the 111th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 10, 1995

Page Finder Index

Printed Page 3730, May 23 | Printed Page 3750, May 23

Printed Page 3740 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

(10) Miscellaneous:
Mr. Abbott meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the office he seeks.
The Bar found Mr. Abbott qualified and said:
He has practiced law for twenty-three years, spending approximately half of his time in the Family Courts. He is perceived by his peers as knowledgeable and possessing the necessary intellect to make a good Family Court judge.
He has an excellent temperament and exhibits mature judgment. He would be an asset to the bench.
Mr. Abbott has unquestioned character and enjoys an excellent reputation in the community. His ethics, honesty, and integrity are above reproach.
He is perceived to be fair, unbiased, and impartial. He would not be influenced by the lawyers or litigants.

The Honorable Lee S. Alford
Candidate for the Family Court of the 16th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified

Judge Alford was screened on May 3, 1995, after a thorough investigation. The Joint Committee's findings as they relate to the nine evaluative criteria are as follows:
(1) Integrity and Impartiality:
Judge Alford demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges.
Judge Alford's SLED report indicated that he had been sued in the matter of Culp v. Burrough which alleged "fraud in real estate will" and named Judge Alford among several other defendants. The matter was filed in federal District Court on June 23, 1983 and was dismissed on October 5, 1983. Judge Alford said that the matter related to an estate that was probated when he was still a small child and that the complaint did not make sense to him.
(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:
The Joint Committee found Judge Alford to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Alford has never been appealed in a reported appellate opinion.
Judge Alford reported that he has never been disciplined or cited for unprofessional conduct or a breach of ethics.
Judge Alford's last Martindale-Hubbell rating (1991) was BV.

Printed Page 3741 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

Judge Alford completed more than 50 hours of CLE in 1994 and a total of 128.67 hours since he became a family court judge in 1991.
(3) Professional Experience:
Judge Alford was associated with an experienced attorney in the general practice of law beginning with his graduation from law school in 1971 until 1977 when he opened his own law practice. I served as a probate judge from 1979 to 1992 and have since that time served on the family court bench. He described his practice of law as evenly divided between the areas of criminal, civil, domestic, probate, and property matters.
Judge Alford has served as a speaker for several continuing legal education classes. His lectures have centered primarily on the South Carolina Probate Code.
As a probate judge, Judge Alford served on the legislative study committee that drafted South Carolina's version of the Uniform Probate Code and on the first Technical Corrections Committee for the Code.
As President of the South Carolina Probate Judges' Association, Judge Alford requested that the Legislative-Governor's Committee on Mental Health and Mental Retardation appoint a task force to study the law concerning the involuntary commitment of persons with chronic addiction to alcohol and drugs. Judge Alford served on that task force which met for one year and drafted a proposed revision of those laws that were approved and passed by the General Assembly.
Judge Alford was appointed the Chief Administrative Family Court Judge for the 16th Circuit after only 6 months of service on the family court bench.
Judge Alford applied for and received a grant to study the Federal Indian Child Welfare Act and the Rights of the Mentally Retarded in Court at the National Judicial College in September, 1994. Judge Alford said that his education in this area of the law was timely because the Catawba Indian Tribe recently received federal recognition, and because the Act supersedes state law as to foster care and adoptions, it is important for family court judges to have a working knowledge of the act.
Judge Alford has actively served on the Bench-Bar Subcommittee for the South Carolina Families for Kids Committee which received a $100,000 planning grant from the Kellogg Foundation to study and recommend changes to the foster care and adoption law and procedures in South Carolina. The group met on Saturdays in Columbia and helped draft a grant application approved by the Kellogg Foundation for $3,000,000 over the next 3 years. Judge Alford said that the group is

Printed Page 3742 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

still meeting and hopes to come up with recommendations that will significantly improve emergency procedures, foster care, and adoption services to children who have been abused or neglected.
Judge Alford is currently serving on a committee with the Department of Juvenile Justice to prepare a grant application to the National Justice Assistance Administration for $500,000. The goal is to start a pilot program for day-reporting centers for non-violent offenders in an effort to work with juvenile delinquents at a local level on a daily basis to turn them around.
Judge Alford has been designated by Court Administration to represent the family court on a Court Improvement Program Grant Committee and will attend a regional conference in Washington D.C. in May, 1995. The United States Congress has allocated $35,000,000 to this project over a 4-year period. The grants are designed to handle foster care and adoption cases and implement a plan to improve case processing.
Judge Alford assisted with the training for a juvenile arbitration program started by the solicitor's office with a grant from the Governor's Office.
(4) Judicial Temperament:
The Joint Committee believes that Judge Alford's temperament would be excellent.
(5) Diligence and Industry:
Judge Alford was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Joint Committee, and the Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.
Judge Alford is married with 2 children, ages 21 and 13.
Judge Alford appointed an Advisory Committee which meets 3 or 4 times a year in an effort to streamline court operations and improve cooperation among agencies and the court. The Advisory Committee is made up of male and female members of the Bar, a court reporter, and representatives from the DSS, DJJ, Solicitor's office, Public Defender's office, Clerk's office, Department of Mental Health, police departments, and Piedmont Legal Services office.
(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Judge Alford appears to be mentally and physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.
(7) Financial Responsibility:
The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Alford has managed his financial affairs responsibly.

Printed Page 3743 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

(8) Public Service:
Judge Alford has been a member of the bench since 1979. He has been extremely active in efforts to improve the laws and legal system and his efforts in that regard are detailed above.
Judge Alford is a very active member of the Bar, his church, and a number of civil organizations. He reported that he does not hold any office or serve on any committee involved in fundraising or where any question could be raised about the use of his position to improperly influence anyone. He indicated that he has curtailed his civic activities in order to minimize the risk of conflict.
Judge Alford was with the United States Air Force from 1960 to 1964 and was honorably discharged.
Judge Alford ran unsuccessfully for the York County Council in 1976 and for the circuit court in 1990.
(9) Ethics:
Judge Alford testified that he has not:
(a) sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b) sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c) asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
(10) Miscellaneous:
Judge Alford meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the office he seeks.
The Bar found Judge Alford qualified and said:
He possesses good knowledge of the law and is highly regarded as a tireless worker by those who have worked with him in the Family Court and previously in his years as Probate Court Judge.
Judge Alford has excellent character, integrity, and reputation.
He is considered to be fair and impartial to litigants and attorneys.

Georgia V. Anderson, Esquire
Candidate for the Family Court of the 7th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified

Ms. Anderson was screened on May 4, 1995, after a thorough investigation. The Joint Committee's findings as they relate to the nine evaluative criteria are as follows:
(1) Integrity and Impartiality:
Ms. Anderson demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges.

Printed Page 3744 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

Ms. Anderson reported that her husband is an attorney with the law firm of Thompson, Sinclair, and Anderson and indicated that she would not preside over matters involving his firm.
Ms. Anderson indicated that she has never been cited or disciplined for unprofessional conduct.
(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:
The Joint Committee found Ms. Anderson to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
(3) Professional Experience:
The Joint Committee has concerns that Ms. Anderson's experience in circuit court was not recent and apparently limited in nature. The Joint Committee believes that this concern is lessened because of Ms. Anderson's substantial magisterial court trial experience.
Ms. Anderson has been a full-time magistrate since 1983. She worked as an Assistant Public Defender upon graduation from law school in 1978 and until becoming a magistrate in 1983. Ms. Anderson indicated in her application materials that she worked in both family and circuit court during her term as a public defender.
Ms. Anderson worked as a support clerk for the Horry County Family Court during the summer between college and law school.
(4) Judicial Temperament:
The Joint Committee believes that Ms. Anderson's temperament would be excellent.
(5) Diligence and Industry:
Ms. Anderson was punctual and attentive in her dealings with the Joint Committee, and the Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any problems with her diligence and industry.
Ms. Anderson is married and has 3 children, ages 13, 11, and 7.
(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Ms. Anderson appears to be mentally and physically capable of performing the duties of the office she seeks.
(7) Financial Responsibility:
The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of a troubled financial status. Ms. Anderson has managed her financial affairs responsibly.
(8) Public Service:
Ms. Anderson has been active in her church and in the parent-teacher organizations affiliated with her children's schools.
(9) Ethics:
Ms. Anderson testified that she has not:

Printed Page 3745 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

(a) sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b) sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c) asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
(10) Miscellaneous:
Ms. Anderson meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the office she seeks.
The Bar found Ms. Anderson qualified and said:
She has served for more than ten years as a trial magistrate for Spartanburg County.
Those interviewed commented on her excellent judicial temperament and favorably on the manner in which she conducts her court room.
While some noted that Judge Anderson had not practiced family law since becoming magistrate, they noted that her intellect, diligence, and experience as a trial magistrate should enable her to serve as a family court judge. They also noted that she had experience in the family court both as a public defender and as an assistant solicitor.

The Honorable H. E. Bonnoitt, Jr.
Candidate for Re-election to the Family Court
for the 15th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified

Judge Bonnoitt was screened on May 3, 1995, after a thorough investigation. The Joint Committee's findings as they relate to the nine evaluative criteria are as follows:
(1) Integrity and Impartiality:
Judge Bonnoitt demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges.
Judge Bonnoitt sold an office building and lot to the County of Georgetown in March of 1991.
(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:
The Joint Committee found Judge Bonnoitt to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Bonnoitt has never been appealed in a reported appellate decision.
Judge Bonnoitt's last known Martindale-Hubbell rating (1991) was BV.

Printed Page 3746 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

(3) Professional Experience:
Judge Bonnoitt was admitted to the Bar in 1973.
Judge Bonnoitt was a solo practitioner from 1973 to 1987. He was a partner in the firm of Bonnoitt & Mitchum from 1987 to 1991. Judge Bonnoitt was the part-time county public defender from 1978 to 1985. He was an attorney for the County Planning Commission and Building Department from 1976 to 1991.
(4) Judicial Temperament:
The Joint Committee believes that Judge Bonnoitt's temperament would be excellent.
(5) Diligence and Industry:
Judge Bonnoitt was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Joint Committee, and the Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.
Judge Bonnoitt is married with 2 adult children.
(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Judge Bonnoitt appears to be mentally and physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.
(7) Financial Responsibility:
The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Bonnoitt has managed his financial affairs responsibly.
(8) Public Service:
Judge Bonnoitt has been a Family Court Judge since 1991.
Judge Bonnoitt is active in church and community activities.
Judge Bonnoitt served in the U.S. Navy from 1965 to 1969 and the U.S. Naval Reserves from 1969 to 1978.
Judge Bonnoitt served as Chairman of the Georgetown Board of Zoning Adjustments from 1983 to 1985. He served as Mayor of the City of Georgetown from 1986 to 1991. Judge Bonnoitt served as Vice-President of the Municipal Association of South Carolina from 1988 to 1991, and then as President in 1991.
Judge Bonnoitt ran unsuccessfully for the S.C. House of Representatives in 1979.
(9) Ethics:
Judge Bonnoitt testified that he has not:
(a) sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b) sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c) asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Printed Page 3747 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

(10) Miscellaneous:
Judge Bonnoitt meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the office he seeks.
The Bar found Judge Bonnoitt qualified and said:
He possesses good intellect and legal ability. He is well-respected for his knowledge and application of the rules of procedure.
He is known to be fair and impartial.
Judge Bonnoitt has a reputation of being well prepared and expects all attorneys appearing before him to be well prepared.
His works habits, temperament, and integrity are good.
Judge Bonnoitt was also sued in 1984 for $15 million dollars by a man he had been appointed to represent on three counts of criminal sexual conduct with a minor. The defendant pled guilty to one count and while serving a 10-year sentence he sued Judge Bonnoitt claiming he had conspired with the Solicitor and the trial judge and generally neglected to prepare his case for trial. The suit ended when Judge Bonnoitt was granted summary judgment.

The Honorable Mary E. Buchan
Candidate for the Family Court of the 12th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified

Judge Buchan was screened on May 4, 1995, after a thorough investigation. The Joint Committee's findings as they relate to the nine evaluative criteria are as follows:
(1) Integrity and Impartiality:
Judge Buchan demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges.
(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:
The Joint Committee found Judge Buchan to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Buchan has never been appealed in a reported appellate decision.
Judge Buchan's last Martindale-Hubbell rating (1992) was BV.
(3) Professional Experience:
Judge Buchan was admitted to the Bar in 1980. She was a teacher for 3 years between college and law school.
Judge Buchan worked for a brief period after law school graduation for Kennedy, Price, Kosko & Coffas. She worked with Timothy Quinn from 1980 to 1982 and was primarily involved in preliminary office work in his Columbia office and in managing his Marion office. She

Printed Page 3748 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

formed the law firm of Whittington & Buchan in 1982 and practiced with the firm until her election to the family court in 1992. Judge Buchan's practice was primarily domestic and commercial law.
(4) Judicial Temperament:
The Joint Committee believes that Judge Buchan's temperament would be excellent.
(5) Diligence and Industry:
Judge Buchan was punctual and attentive in her dealings with the Joint Committee, and the Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any problems with her diligence and industry.
Judge Buchan is married with 2 adult stepchildren and an 8-year old child.
(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Judge Buchan appears to be mentally and physically capable of performing the duties of the office she seeks.
(7) Financial Responsibility:
The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Buchan has managed her financial affairs responsibly.
(8) Public Service:
Judge Buchan is active in church activities. She has also been involved as a panelist or speaker for school programs, domestic violence community meetings, forums on juvenile problems, and guardian ad litem seminars.
Judge Buchan has been a family court judge since 1992.
(9) Ethics:
Judge Buchan testified that she has not:
(a) sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b) sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator pending the outcome of screening; or
(c) asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
(10) Miscellaneous:
Judge Buchan meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the office she seeks.
The Bar found Ms. Buchan qualified and said:
She is considered to be an excellent Family Court judge. She is well- prepared and industrious. She is diligent and organized in her administrative duties.
Judge Buchan grasps issues quickly and makes rulings that are fair to litigants. Her analytical skills are sound.

Printed Page 3749 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

Her temperament on the bench is considered to be outstanding. She displays much patience with litigants and attorneys who appear before her.

Janet T. Butcher, Esquire
Candidate for the Family Court of the 5th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified

Ms. Butcher was screened on May 8, 1995, after a thorough investigation. The Joint Committee's findings as they relate to the nine evaluative criteria are as follows:
(1) Integrity and Impartiality:
Ms. Butcher demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges.
(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:
The Joint Committee found Ms. Butcher to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Ms. Butcher has taught the following law-related courses and lectures:
(a) "Local Controls in Practice" (CLE)
(b) "Impact Fees" (CLE)
(c) "Negotiation Skills" and "Developing a Better Working Relationship with Your Court Appointed Attorney" (Guardian Ad Litem Conference)
(d) "Substantive Criminal Law" (USC College of Criminal Justice)
(e) "Child Abuse and Neglect" (USC College of Criminal Justice)

Ms. Butcher is not rated in Martindale-Hubbell.
(3) Professional Experience:
The Joint Committee as only able to identify with any certainty one typical family court trial matter handled by Ms. Butcher. The Joint Committee therefore expresses concern over her level of experience with family court trial matters.
Ms. Butcher described her practice as follows:
(a) 1982 to 1983 Private Practice with Furman, Speedy & Stegner (general and family law)
(b) 1983 to 1986 Richland County Public Defender (General Sessions and Family Court)
(c) 1986 to 1987 Solo practitioner with a general and family law practice. Assistant Solicitor, 11th Circuit, handling abuse and neglect and criminal matters. Adjunct Professor, College of Criminal Justice,

Printed Page 3750 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995

teaching substantive criminal law and a graduate course on abuse and neglect.

Printed Page 3730, May 23 | Printed Page 3750, May 23

Page Finder Index