| Printed Page 200, Jan. 13 | Printed Page 220, Jan. 13 |

We'd originally advised him that he could be present at 1:00 p.m. When he came at 1:00, we told him to come back at 3:00 not realizing that we would have extended Executive Session and extended hearing on Judge Cottingham of this length. Those are the next set of candidates up. There are two candidates in that race. We also have Judge Burnett present from Spartanburg. That's just a point of information for the Committee in terms of trying to arrange our schedule.
THE CHAIRMAN: So we do not have one of the witnesses in that-- do they want to come back tomorrow?
MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I would wonder if it would be possible realizing that folks do have schedules that if we could take up both of the candidates for the Fifth Judicial Circuit first thing in the morning rather than dividing that race and proceed directly to taking up Judge Burnett this evening and then coming back in the morning at 10:00 a.m. starting with the Fifth Circuit and then moving on.
THE CHAIRMAN: Just a second. What kind of shape would that put us in for tomorrow?
MR. COUICK: If I could ask the two candidates, Mr. Manning and Ms. Burnette, would it be possible to rearrange your schedules to be here in the morning at 10:00 o'clock thinking that we could be concluded sometime around noon.
MS. BURNETTE: That'd be fine.
MR. COUICK: Mr. Manning?
MR. MANNING: Yes, I think I would.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank ya'll. We appreciate it very much. We're going to take a short break and give our court reporter a chance to rest her fingers and then we'll be back and we'll take up the Seventh Judicial Circuit, Judge Burnett. Let's see we're on Senate time. Ten minutes.

1. E. C. Burnett, III
Home Address: Business Address:
200 Burnett Road P. O. Box 1742
Pauline, SC 29374 Spartanburg, SC 29304

2. He was born in Spartanburg, South Carolina on January 26, 1942. He is presently 51 years old.

4. He was married to Jamie Grant on August 24, 1964. He has three children: Curry, age 28 (Milliken & Company); Sharon B. West, age 25 (elementary school teacher); and Jeffrey G., age 22 (Roebuck Greenhouses).

6. He attended Wofford College, 1960-1964, B.A.; and the University of South Carolina School of Law, 1966-1969, J.D.

8. Legal/Judicial education during the past five years:
During the past five years, he has met or exceeded the minimum judicial education requirements.

9. Taught or Lectured: South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, Spartanburg-Cherokee Legal Secretaries' Association

12. Legal experience since graduation from law school:
1969-1976: Private Law Practice, Criminal, Workers' Compensation
1976-May, 1980: Spartanburg County Probate Court Judge
May, 1980 - September, 1981: Resident Family Court Judge, Seventh Judicial Circuit
September, 1981 - Present: Resident Circuit Court Judge, Seventh Judicial Circuit

13. Rating in Martindale-Hubbell: He has never applied for rating in Martindale-Hubbell and is unaware that he is now listed.

20. Judicial Office:

1976-May 1, 1980 - Spartanburg County Probate Judge (Elected) Probate of Deceased Estates

May 1, 1980-September 17, 1981 - Judge, Family Court, Seventh Judicial Circuit (Elected) Juvenile and Domestic Relations

September 17, 1981-Present - Judge, Seventh Judicial Circuit (Elected) General Jurisdiction Civil and Criminal Litigation, Administrative Agency and Magistrate Court Appellate Jurisdiction

21. Five (5) Significant Orders or Opinions:
(a) Rodney Hollis v. Housing Authority of Spartanburg, 92-CP-42- 2637

22. Public Office: February-June, 1978, Spartanburg County Clerk of Court (appointed as a result of indictment of sitting Clerk of Court); 1973- 1974, Member, South Carolina House of Representatives from Spartanburg County (Elected)

32. Sued: James E. Loftin, an inmate of the S. C. Department of Corrections, brought suit against him in May of 1982. The suit was dismissed in May of 1983.

45. Bar Associations and Professional Organizations:
South Carolina Bar Association; American Bar Association, Judicial Administration Division

46. Civic, charitable, educational, social and fraternal organizations:
None

48. Five (5) letters of recommendation:
(a) Louie W. Blanton, Vice President
South Carolina National Bank
P. O. Box 5707, Spartanburg, SC 29304
(b) Horace C. Smith, Esquire
The Whiteside-Smith Firm
P. O. Box 1144, Spartanburg, SC 29304
582-4569
(c) Michael E. Spears, Esquire
P. O. Box 5806, Spartanburg, SC 29304
582-5472
(d) H. Carlisle Bean, Esquire
Bean and Bean
P. O. Box 81, Spartanburg, SC 29304
582-3341

2. Positions on the Bench:
Spartanburg County Probate Court: 1/76-5/80
Seventh Judicial Circuit Family Court: 5/80-9/81
Seventh Judicial Circuit: 9/81-present

10. Extra-Judicial Community Involvement:
He has not used his judicial office to further any interests.

The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline reports that no Formal Complaints of any kind have been filed against you. The records of the applicable law enforcement agencies: The Spartanburg County Sheriff's, a negative; Spartanburg City Police Department, a negative; SLED and FBI records are negative.

The Judgement Rolls of Spartanburg County are negative. Federal court records showed no judgements or criminal actions against you.

There were two civil actions -- civil -- yes, actions brought against you. One action involved a habeas corpus which was dismissed in 1985. The other action was brought against you and a number of South Carolina court officials alleging a civil rights violation and this case was dismissed in 1989. It could have been one of those class actions you didn't even know you got sued.
JUDGE BURNETT: I didn't. I didn't have any idea.
THE CHAIRMAN: All right, sir. I note that no complaints or statements were received and to my knowledge, we have no witnesses to present to testify, so with that, I'm going to turn the questioning over to Mr. Couick and please answer his questions, sir.
JUDGE BURNETT - EXAMINATION BY MR. COUICK:
Q. Judge, I'm sorry to take you so long in the evening. We had originally told you, you'd be earlier today. If you need anything, please let me know, in particular a copy of your Personal Data Questionnaire whatever. You are applying for reelection. Do you intend to serve throughout this term if you are reelected to this court?
A. Yes. Certainly that's my intention.

We are aware that there will always be occasions where witnesses will be out of pocket, be hospitalized. Litigants might be. We on occasion probably inconvenience some people, but where there are genuine emergencies, the proper cause to continue a case, we would certainly do that with a view towards -- well, with a complete recognition that the court system is not here for you or for I, but for the litigants.

They are the ones that we seek to accommodate as fully as best as we can. That is the place that they can air their grievance. It just so happens that a judge is involved in it and lawyers are involved in it. The system is there for the litigants and we accommodate them in every way that we can.
Q. Judge, how do you maintain the admonition of the Canons to avoid ex parte communication?
A. On the civil side, we just avoid them. We just don't do them. In the nonjury court is the place that there is the greatest opportunity for ex parte communication and the process I follow is that after a hearing if I am able to rule upon the matter, I do so at the hearing.

I think the deterrent effect is not a reality. It's strictly in my view a matter of punishment. I think that's all. The defendant rarely gets in front of me, but that's generally what I do. I was a criminal defense lawyer while I was in private practice along with civil practice and the other things that a general lawyer would do and I had -- maybe I knew too

I'm a strong believer in restitution. I think in every case even before ya'll mandated that that be done, restitution was absolutely required in every case of any loss to any victim. I've always -- I've done that for the 13 years I've been doing this.
Q. Judge, in 1992, in January of that year, you allowed your name or requested your name to be listed in an advertisement I believe in the Spartanburg Herald Journal endorsing the, what was called I believe the Human Life Protection Act. Realizing this is a very volatile issue in a matter of political and ethical and moral and staying away from the whole nature of how volatile the issue is, there is also the matter of the Canon of Ethics, Canon 7 and Canon 2 prohibiting judges from involving themselves in matters of public controversy.

You, I believe, had a complaint filed against you with the Board of Commissioners of Judicial Standards and I believe you also consented to some type of reprimand acknowledging that you had, in fact, without acknowledging intent violated Canon 7 and Canon 2.

This Committee has not had occasion very often to encounter this type of activity and really has not developed any firm approach to how they wish to proceed to discuss it with candidates, but I did want to bring it to their attention and also ask for your reaction.

What did you gather out of the experience? What rules, formal or informal, do you now allow to govern your involvement in matters that could be of a public controversy?
A. Judges have no public life. Judges cannot be involved in anything. Judges are neuter. It is unfair that judge's caliber of the -- and I set myself aside from this -- the caliber that we have in South Carolina, we're unable to participate in the process, a process that do not involve us in our judicial capacities.
Q. What is the -- what is your understanding of the wisdom or the rationale behind Canon 7 and Canon 2 as the reasons they were developed? Why is there this prohibition on this type of activity on judges?
A. To insulate us, I would imagine, from the pressures of the public, so that we continue to give the appearance of fairness, appearance of doing the right thing in every circumstance.
Q. And, Judge, I'm not trying to read too much into your comments, but I do sense in what you said initially as a reaction that perhaps this was a

| Printed Page 200, Jan. 13 | Printed Page 220, Jan. 13 |