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 3740, May 23
| Printed Page 3760, May 23
|
Printed Page 3750 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
(d) 1987 to 1992 Attorney for the Town of Hilton Head Island. Work involved
municipal law, zoning, contracts, and employment law.
Handled appointed cases in Family and General Sessions
Court.
(e) 1991 to 1994 U.S. Attorney's Office -- Criminal and civil law, Drug Task
Force, prosecution of child pornography.
(f) 1994 to Present General Counsel, DSS. Child and adult abuse and neglect,
contracts, employment law, administrative duties, oversee
criminal and civil investigations.
Ms. Butcher described her experience over the last 5 years as 50% civil and
50% criminal with a couple of pro bono and appointed family court matters.
Ms. Butcher's described her 5 most significant litigated matters to
include:
(a) a Section 1983 action in federal court;
(b) a civil wiretap case that was part of an action for divorce;
(c) a criminal prosecution in federal court on a charge of child
pornography;
(d) the 3 day trial of a child custody matter in which one party had a history
of child abuse and the other party had a criminal record;
(e) a foreclosure matter on behalf of the IRS.
Ms. Butcher has not handled a domestic appeal, but has handled 2 civil
appeals to the 4th Circuit.
In response to the Joint Committee's request for a list of those family
court matters that she has handled over the last 6 years, Ms. Butcher
provided the following list:
(a) U.S. v. Hutto: A criminal prosecution in federal court on charges
of sexual exploitation of children.
(b) U.S. v. Jennings: A criminal prosecution in federal court on 2 gun
charges. The prosecution involved matters regarding stipulations,
evidence of drug dealing, and after-discovered evidence. Ms. Butcher also
handled the appeal of this matter to the 4th Circuit.
(c) Willard v. City of Myrtle Beach: A Section 1983 action in federal
court. There were 2 trials involved in this matter because the first
ended in a verdict for the defendant and Ms. Butcher was granted a new
trial.
Printed Page 3751 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
(d) Janice McQueen v. U.S.: A bench trial on a foreclosure action.
The matter took 3 days of trial.
(e) Town of Hilton Head Island v. Charlie Howell: This was a jury
trial in magistrate's court on a criminal offense for a violation of the
town's municipal code.
(f) Kudlak v. Town of Hilton Head Island: This was an appeal to
circuit court of a zoning decision by the Town's Planning Commission.
Plaintiff sought a variance of the Town's setback ordinance.
(g) Beaufort County D.S.S. v. George Grant: This was a one day trial
of a matter involving the sexual abuse of a teenage girl by her
grandfather. Ms. Butcher represented the grandfather who was found
guilty.
(h) Beaufort County D.S.S. v. Barratine: This was a family court
matter which involved the abandonment of a teenager by his parents who
were living overseas.
(i) S.C. D.S.S. v. Susan Vaughn, a minor 16 years of age, and Beverly
Russell, her stepfather; Ex parte: The State-Record Co., Inc.: This
was the high-profile action in family court to open the files of Susan
Smith's 1988 abuse by her stepfather. Ms. Butcher represented DSS's
position that the file should remain sealed because of the confidentiality
rule and statutes.
(j) Federal National Mortgage Association v. Dean Romigh: This was a
foreclosure action in which Ms. Butcher represented the United States and
contested the priority of claims for surplus funds.
(k) Town of Hilton Head Island Real Estate Transfer Fee Ordinance: Ms.
Butcher researched the law and wrote the ordinance, but did not
handle the case in court. The ordinance was upheld.
(4) Judicial Temperament:
The Joint Committee believes that Ms. Butcher's temperament would be
excellent.
(5) Diligence and Industry:
Ms. Butcher 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. Butcher is married with 2 grown children.
(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Ms. Butcher appears to be mentally and physically capable of performing the
duties of the office she seeks.
Printed Page 3752 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
(7) Financial Responsibility:
The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of a troubled
financial status. Ms. Butcher has managed her financial affairs
responsibly.
(8) Public Service:
Ms. Butcher has worked in the public sector for much of her career.
(9) Ethics:
Ms. Butcher reported in her application materials that her campaign
expenditures total $1,005.86
Ms. Butcher 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:
Ms. Butcher meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the
office she seeks.
The Bar found Ms. Butcher qualified and said:
She is regarded as competent, industrious, conscientious, and knowledgeable
in the law.
During the thirteen years that she has been admitted to practice, she has
gained experience in the office of the Public Defender, in the office of the
solicitor for the Fifth Judicial Circuit, in the office of the United States
Attorney, and as counsel for the Department of Social Services.
Her experience in Family Court has been varied and extensive including
abuse-and-neglect cases, juvenile-crime cases, paternity cases, nonsupport
cases, termination-of-parental-rights cases, custody cases, and divorce
cases.
Ms. Butcher is perceived as pleasant, fair-minded, hard-working, and
efficient.
Printed Page 3750 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
The Honorable William R. Byars, Jr.
Candidate for Re-election to the Family Court
of the 5th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified
Judge Byars 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:
Printed Page 3753 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
(1) Integrity and Impartiality:
Judge Byars demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct
and other ethical considerations important to judges.
Judge Byars is the President, Director, and one-third owner of Happy Jack
Promotions, Inc., a company primarily engaged in selling citrus and apples to
band booster clubs. Judge Byars chairs meetings of the Board of Directors,
assists in setting company policies, but is not involved in the daily activity
of the company.
Judge Byars and his wife own interest in seven rental houses. His wife, who
is formerly a real estate agent, manages the property.
(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:
The Joint Committee found Judge Byars to be intelligent and knowledgeable.
His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met
expectations.
Judge Byars has been appealed in three reported appellate decisions and was
reaffirmed in all three matters.
Judge Byars was a member of the Law Review at the University of South
Carolina School of Law.
Judge Byars has been a frequent speaker at CLE conferences.
Judge Byars' Martindale-Hubbell rating was BV in 1989.
(3) Professional Experience:
Judge Byars was admitted to the Bar in 1972.
Judge Byars was with the Savage Law Firm from 1972 to his election to the
bench in 1989. His practice initially was mainly in the areas of real estate
and criminal law. After a few years his practice grew into a general trial
practice, contracts, and family law. In the last 10 years, his practice
continued to evolve and became much more business oriented. He represented
several statewide business associations as general counsel and also served as
general counsel for the Multiple Employer Insurance Fund and two workers'
compensation funds. He represented Kershaw County Council from 1975 to 1989,
and was general counsel to the Kershaw Memorial Hospital for 14 years. He
continued an active trial practice in Common Pleas, General Sessions, and
Family Court until elected to the bench in 1989.
(4) Judicial Temperament:
The Joint Committee believes that Judge Byars' temperament would be
excellent.
(5) Diligence and Industry:
Judge Byars 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.
Printed Page 3754 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
Judge Byars is married with 3 adult children.
(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Judge Byars 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 Byars has managed his financial affairs
responsibly.
(8) Public Service:
Judge Byars was on active duty with the U.S. Army from 1967 to 1969 and his
tour of duty included service in Vietnam. He was awarded the Bronze Star and
Army Accommodation medal. He served in the U.S. Army Reserves from 1969 to
1973 when he was honorably discharged.
Judge Byars has been a Family Court Judge since 1989.
Judge Byars was a member of the Kershaw County School Board from 1980 to
1989.
Judge Byars is active in professional and community activities.
(9) Ethics:
Judge Byars 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 Byars meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the
office he seeks.
The Bar found Judge Byars qualified and said:
He is well-respected by his peers and members of the Bar for his legal
ability and analytical skills.
He is able to rule promptly and is well-prepared in matters that come
before him. He has a good work ethic.
Judge Byars is actively involved in issues related to the Family Court and
improvement of the family court system in South Carolina.
He is fair and impartial with excellent judicial temperament. He is
courteous and considerate of litigants and attorneys who appear before
him.
His character, integrity and reputation are outstanding.
Judge Byars has been sued on six occasions. He describes those matters as
follows:
Printed Page 3755 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
(a) Ex parte Wendy Rabon v. Kershaw County School
District and Board of Trustees: Listed as an individual defendant
with all other school board members. The matter involved a minor child
injured on a school ground. Settlement was reached in this case and this
matter was brought for court approval of a minor settlement.
(b) Federal National Mortgage Association v. John Counts, Shirley
Counts, Family Credit Services, S.C. Tax Commission, Savage, Royal,
Kinard, Sheheen, and Byars as Partners and Individually: The law
firm had previously closed a real estate transaction for the
defendant, John Counts. The check written by Mr. Counts was not
honored by the bank. Mr. Counts made part payments on the check, but
eventually the law firm brought suit against him and obtained a
judgment against him for the balance due. When Mr. Counts did not
maintain his mortgage payments, a foreclosure action was brought by
the Federal National Mortgage Association. The law firm and each of
the partners individually were named as a party defendant insomuch as
they were judgment creditors of Mr. Counts. No judgment was sought
nor given against the law firm or Judge Byars.
(c) First Federal Savings and Loan v. Paul Brown, Betty Brown, William
Byars, Trustee, et al.: This was a foreclosure action brought by
First Federal in which Judge Byars was joined as a party defendant due
to a second mortgage he held on the property as trustee. No judgment
was sought nor rendered against Judge Byars.
(d) James Miller v. Alice Boykin, Dale Thiel, William Byars, Jr., Camille
Byars, and J. Clator Arrants: James B. Miller brought suit against
his tenants in common, Alice Boykin and Dale Thiel, to partition certain
acreage that they owned north of Camden. The Judge and Mrs. Byars owned
a deeded but unlocated 50 ft. easement over and across the acreage for
the purposes of ingress and egress and underground utilities. They were
joined in this suit for the purposes of locating the easement. J.
Clator Arrants, an adjacent land owner, was joined in the case for
purposes of determining his rights of ingress and egress.
(e) First Federal of South Carolina v. Clarence Lewis, Marianna Lewis, and
William Byars: This was a foreclosure action brought against Clarence
and Marianna Lewis. Judge Byars was joined in this action because of a
second mortgage in the amount of $1,800.00 which he held on the property
being foreclosed upon.
Printed Page 3756 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
No personal judgment was sought nor rendered against Judge Byars.
(f) Paul Lewis v. Savage Law Firm and Bill Byars: Mr. Lewis entered
into a property settlement and separation agreement without consulting
an attorney. This agreement was dated April 26, 1988. On April 27,
1988, Kitty Lewis, through her attorney, brought suit to approve the
agreement. Mr. Lewis decided to attempt to repudiate the agreement and
retained Judge Byars to represent him. The matter was in litigation for
a year and on April 26, 1989, a new agreement was signed and was
approved on May 8, 1989 by Judge Robert Burnside. Under the new
agreement, Mrs. Lewis gave up her right to alimony. On October 15,
1992, Mr. Lewis filed suit in Magistrate's Court alleging that items
"were omitted from my divorce decree." The divorce decree
incorporated the terms of the amended agreement signed by Mr. Lewis.
Mr. Lewis' suit was dismissed.
The Honorable Richard W. Chewning, III
Candidate for Re-election to the Family Court
of the 11th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified
Judge Chewning 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 Chewning demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial
Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges.
Judge Chewning reported that he is still receiving monies on files he left
with his law firm, Setzler, Chewning & Scott.
(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:
The Joint Committee found Judge Chewning to be intelligent and knowledgeable.
His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met
expectations.
Judge Chewning has been appealed in 1 published appellate decision. The
matter was a contract action appealed from a decision made by Judge Chewning
serving as a special referee. Judge Chewning was reversed on a question of
law.
Judge Chewning's last Martindale-Hubbell rating (1994) was AV.
(3) Professional Experience:
Judge Chewning was admitted to the Bar in 1972.
Judge Chewning described his legal experience as follows:
Printed Page 3757 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
(a) 1970-1973 Worked as a law clerk for the firm of Kennedy & Price.
Became well-trained in real estate work including abstracting
titles, setting up subdivisions for developers, and closing
loans. He also handled collections (set up a firm procedure
and oversaw it with secretarial help), foreclosures, wills,
estates, bodily injury matters, adoptions, and general defense
work.
(b) 1973-1977 Opened his own law practice and began a general practice of
law. His practice involved criminal cases, wills, estates,
real estate, civil cases (primarily accident claims), defense
of individuals who had been sued, family court (divorces,
adoptions, and guardian ad litem work), bankruptcy,
foreclosures, workers' compensation, and work in magistrate's
and city traffic court.
(c) 1977-1994 Formed the law firm of Setzler, Chewning & Scott. Work
involved real estate, wills, and domestic matters.
(d) 1978-1990 Served as a special referee (grew to 50% of his annual income)
in matters primarily involving foreclosures and in other
actions such as property line disputes and complex corporate
and business disputes.
(e) 1976-1994 Served as judge for the City of Cayce handling regular traffic
court, preliminary hearings, jury trials, execution of
warrants and search warrants, bond hearings, and the appeals
from this court.
(f) 1994-Present Served as judge of the Family Court of the 11th Judicial
Circuit.
Judge Chewning worked as an insurance adjuster and investigator for 5 years
between college and law school.
(4) Judicial Temperament:
The Joint Committee believes that Judge Chewning's temperament would be
excellent.
There was an article in the 9/7/89 edition of the State which
described some of Judge Chewning's experiences as a city judge for the town of
Cayce. The article gives several examples of what it describes as Judge
Chewning's "willingness to be fair" and his tendency to show
sympathy for the accused. It also indicated that he goes to great lengths to
work with kids having their first day in court.
Printed Page 3758 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
There was an article in the 6/30/94 edition of the State reporting on
Judge Chewning's transition from city judge to the family court. The article
quoted Judge Chewning as saying that "[he] always felt that [he] should
treat people in court like [he] wants to be treated." The article also
said that one of Judge Chewning's special interests, both inside and outside
the courtroom, is children.
(5) Diligence and Industry:
Judge Chewning 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 Chewning is married with 2 adult children.
(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Judge Chewning 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 Chewning has managed his financial affairs
responsibly.
(8) Public Service:
Judge Chewning served as special referee from 1978 to 1990 as a municipal
judge from 1976 to 1994, and as a family court judge since 1994.
Judge Chewning has been active in professional and community activities.
Judge Chewning has done volunteer motivational public speaking to church and
community groups on the issues of:
(a) legal careers;
(b) child abuse and neglect;
(c) youthful offenses; and
(d) laws relating to youthful offenders.
(9) Ethics:
Judge Chewning 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 Chewning meets the constitutional and statutory requirements for the
office he seeks.
The Bar found Judge Chewning qualified and said:
Printed Page 3759 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23,
1995
An overwhelming majority of the members of the Bar contacted respect him
for his legal skills, impartiality, judicial temperament, and promptness and
industry in his work since being recently elected.
Judge Chewning's character, integrity, and reputation are considered
excellent.
The Honorable Wayne M. Creech
Candidate for Re-election to the Family Court
of the 9th Judicial Circuit
Joint Committee's Finding: Qualified
Judge Creech was screened on May 5, 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 Creech 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 Creech to be intelligent and knowledgeable.
His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions
exceeded expectations.
Judge Creech has been appealed in two reported appellate decisions and was
reaffirmed in both of those matters.
Judge Creech was in Order of the Wig and Robe at the University of South
Carolina School of Law.
Judge Creech gave a 1990 CLE presentation on how to deal with allegations of
child sexual abuse in the context of a child custody case.
Judge Creech's last Martindale-Hubbell rating (1988) was BV.
(3) Professional Experience:
Judge Creech has served as the Chief Administrative Judge for the Family
Court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit.
Judge Creech was admitted to the Bar in 1976.
Judge Creech practiced real estate and domestic relations law with H. N. West
from 1976 to 1977. He practiced real estate, domestic relations, criminal,
and general civil litigation with the law firm of Dennis, Dennis & Watson
from 1977 to 1981. Judge Creech continued the practice of law with the law
firm of Watson & Creech from 1981 to 1987. Judge Creech was a sole
practitioner from 1987 until his election to the bench in 1988.
Judge Creech served as a Moncks Corner town attorney from 1980 to 1987.
| Printed Page 3740, May 23
| Printed Page 3760, May 23
|
Page Finder Index