Journal of the Senate
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 2990, May 23 | Printed Page 3010, May 23 |
Printed Page 3000 . . . . . 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
Printed Page 3001 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
ended in a verdict for the defendant and Ms. Butcher was granted a new trial.
(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.
Printed Page 3002 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
(6)Mental and Physical Capabilities:
Ms. Butcher 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. 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 3003 . . . . . 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

Printed Page 3000 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
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:
(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.
Printed Page 3004 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
(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.
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.
Printed Page 3005 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
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:

(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

Printed Page 3006 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
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. 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.

Printed Page 3007 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
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:
(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.
Printed Page 3008 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
(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.
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.
Printed Page 3009 . . . . . Tuesday, May 23, 1995
(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:
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.

| Printed Page 2990, May 23 | Printed Page 3010, May 23 |
Page Finder Index

This web page was last updated on Monday, June 29, 2009 at 2:11 P.M.