Journal of the Senate
of the Second Session of the 111th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 9, 1996

Page Finder Index

| Printed Page 510, Feb. 6 | Printed Page 530, Feb. 6 |

Printed Page 520 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

(b) D.S.S. v. Jennings. One defendant, 8 custodial parents, and 13 children. Defendant is 28 years old.

(c) D.S.S v. Coker, 93-DR-23-119. Termination of Parental Rights proceeding. AFDC was an issue in the termination proceeding.

(d) D.S.S. v. Norwood, 93-DR-23-5988. Paternity establishment and child support case.

(e) D.S.S. v. Collier, 92-DR-23-2147. Motion to set aside judgment under Rule 60(b). Defendant's attorney at original proceeding was subsequently disbarred.

At the request of the Joint Committee, Ms. Davis provided representative cases she has handled in the domestic area. Ms. Davis stated that through her work in child support enforcement, she had been introduced to other areas of domestic law. This information was incorporated into the transcript of Ms. Davis' public hearing.

The Joint Committee expressed some concern over Ms. Davis's limited experience with certain areas of family law.

(4) Judicial Temperament:

The Committee believes Ms. Davis' temperament would be good.

(5) Diligence and Industry:

Ms. Davis 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. Davis is single and has no children.

(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:

Ms. Davis 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. Davis has managed her financial affairs responsibly.

(8) Public Service:

Ms. Davis is active in professional and community activities.

(9) Ethics:

Ms. Davis testified that she has not:

(a) sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;


Printed Page 521 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

(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.

Ms. Davis testified that she was aware of the Joint Committee's rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Ms. Davis testified that she was aware of the requirement of reporting campaign expenditures in excess of $100 to the House and Senate Ethics Committees.

(10) Miscellaneous:

Ms. Davis meets the constitutional requirements for the office she seeks.

The Bar found Ms. Davis qualified. The Bar reported that Ms. Davis "possesses an acceptable but limited knowledge of family law but is highly regarded as a diligent worker by those who have worked with her in the Family Court and previously. Her personal industry in staying current with family law and vigorously pursuing delinquent accounts is felt to be commendable. Ms. Davis is considered to have high ethics, character, integrity, and reputation. Although some concern was expressed about her judicial temperament, most individuals surveyed felt that she would be fair and impartial to both litigants and attorneys."

Ernest Hamilton

Thirteenth Circuit Family Court, Seat 5

Joint Committee's Finding:Qualified

Mr. Hamilton was screened on December 18, 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:

The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct.

Mr. Hamilton demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.


Printed Page 522 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:

The Joint Committee found Mr. Hamilton to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Hamilton has not been rated by Martindale-Hubbell.

(3) Professional Experience:

Mr. Hamilton graduated from the University of South Carolina School of Law in 1984 and was admitted to the Bar later in the same year.

Since his graduation from law school, Mr. Hamilton has worked exclusively as an assistant solicitor for the 13th Judicial Circuit.

Mr. Hamilton described his practice over the past five years as 100% criminal.

Mr. Hamilton provided the Joint Committee with five of his most significant litigated matters which he described as follows:

(a) State v. Stanley E. Woods, 84-GS-23-3956, Armed Robbery; 84-GS-23-3955, Kidnapping; 84-GS-23-3954, Rape.

(b) State v. Robert Lagore, 90-GS-23-3427, 90-GS-23-3428, 90-GS-23-3427. Felony DUI case. Issue was whether defendant was legally impaired with a BAC of .09 and the admissibility of a blood test not taken at the direction of the arresting officer in accordance with the statute.

(c) State v. John David Coleman, 86-GS-23-236. DUI case. Jury returned verdict in 6 minutes making it the shortest jury deliberation in Greenville County.

(d) State v. Robert W. Davis, 90-GS-23-4332. Felony DUI case. Issue was whether the defendant was under 17 since the accident occurred on his birthday but before the time listed on his birth certificate as his time of birth.

(e) State v. Thomas Lynn Porter, 85-GS-23-0899. Setting up Lotteries case.

At the request of the Joint Committee, Mr. Hamilton provided supplemental information as to his practice in the areas of Divorce and Equitable Division of Property, Child Custody, Adoption, Abuse and Neglect, and Juvenile Justice. This information was incorporated into the transcript of Mr. Hamilton's public hearing.

Based on his scope of practice, the Committee expressed some concern over Mr. Hamilton's lack of experience in certain aspects of the practice of family law.


Printed Page 523 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

(4) Judicial Temperament:

The Joint Committee believes that Mr. Hamilton's temperament would be excellent.

(5) Diligence and Industry:

Mr. Hamilton 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.

Mr. Hamilton is married and has two children.

(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:

Mr. Hamilton 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. Mr. Hamilton has managed his financial affairs responsibly.

(8) Public Service:

Mr. Hamilton is active in professional and community activities.

(9) Ethics:

Mr. Hamilton 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.

Mr. Hamilton testified that he was aware of the Joint Committee's rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Hamilton testified that he was aware of the requirement of reporting campaign expenditures in excess of $100 to the House and Senate Ethics Committees.

(10) Miscellaneous:

Mr. Hamilton meets the constitutional requirements for the office he seeks.

The Bar found Mr. Hamilton qualified. The Bar reported that "although it is believed that [Mr. Hamilton] has limited experience in the area of family law, his knowledge of the law is acceptable overall.


Printed Page 524 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

History reflects that he should be able to study and acquire an adequate measure of the knowledge he would need for the position. It is perceived that he will bring considerable life experiences, common sense, and empathy with him to the family court system. Mr. Hamilton is highly respected by his peers and well thought of by the legal and non-legal community. He is considered a role model. His character, integrity, and reputation for fairness are outstanding. It is perceived that he would demonstrate excellent judicial temperament without bias in favor of or against any particular position or litigant."

Robert N. Jenkins

Thirteenth Circuit Family Court, Seat 5

Joint Committee's Finding:Qualified

Mr. Jenkins was screened on December 18, 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:

The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct.

Mr. Jenkins demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:

Mr. Jenkins has taught the Juvenile Law/Pre-Trial Diversion Course through the sponsorship of the Department of Youth Services.

The Joint Committee found Mr. Jenkins to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Mr. Jenkins has not been rated by Martindale-Hubbell.

(3) Professional Experience:

Mr. Jenkins graduated from the University of South Carolina School of Law in 1976 and was admitted to the Bar later in the same year.

Mr. Jenkins was employed as Staff Attorney/Managing Attorney with the Legal Services Agency in Charleston, South Carolina from 1976 to 1979. Since 1979, he has been Director/General Counsel for Legal Services Agency of Western Carolina, Inc. in Greenville, South Carolina.


Printed Page 525 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

Mr. Jenkins described his practice over the past five years as 65% civil and 35% domestic.

Mr. Jenkins provided the Joint Committee with five of his most significant litigated matters which he described as follows:

(a) Fieldcrest Tenants Association, et al. vs. Housing Authority of Greenville, U.S. District Court, Greenville, S.C. (1980). This case involved Due Process rights of public housing tenants against irregular conduct and practices of public housing management in setting improper rent, improper assessments, and improper evictions. Resolved by Court Consent.

(b) John Plumley, et al. vs. School District of Greenville and State Board of Education, #81-1894 (4th Cir. 1982). Allowed reasonable staff attorney fees in successful Section 1983 actions.

(c) Greenville Housing Authority vs. Jessie Salters, ___ S.C. ___, 316 S.E.2d 718 (1984). Defense of ejectment action against 64 year old lady.

(d) Jenkins et al. vs. American Modern Homes, et al., 90-10-5549 (Charleston County Circuit Ct.). Insurance action where company attempted to argue exclusion. Settled before trial.

(e) Hatchcock and Shuly vs. Tammy McKensie, 94-CP-23-1336 (on appeal to S.C. Supreme Court). Defense of ejectment proceeding brought by landlord against defendant. Case resolved favorably in interest of client.

Mr. Jenkins provided the Joint Committee with the following domestic appeals he has handled:

(a) Creel vs. Miles, In re Dianne Mary Miles, MO 79-179 (1979). Unsuccessful attempt to get practical compliance with 10 day hearing requirement when a child is taken into protective custody.

(b) Davis v. Davis, Unpublished memorandum opinion 1980. Issue was whether legal counsel was required in civil contempt proceedings in Family Court when jail term will be imposed.

At the Joint Committee's request, Mr. Jenkins described his practice in the following areas of domestic law: divorce and equitable division of property, child custody, adoption, abuse and neglect, and juvenile justice. Mr. Jenkins also provided a list of representative domestic cases that he has handled. This information was incorporated into the record of Mr. Jenkins' public hearing.

The Joint Committee determined that Mr. Jenkins had engaged in an active trial practice in the family courts of South Carolina, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.


Printed Page 526 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

(4) Judicial Temperament:

The Joint Committee believes that Mr. Jenkins' temperament would be excellent.

(5) Diligence and Industry:

Mr. Jenkins 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.

Mr. Jenkins is married and has two children.

(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:

Mr. Jenkins 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. Mr. Jenkins has managed his financial affairs responsibly.

(8) Public Service:

Mr. Jenkins served in the U.S. Air Force from August 1966 to August 1969, and in the active reserves from June 1969 to August 1972. He was honorably discharged in August 1972.

Mr. Jenkins is active in professional and community activities.

(9) Ethics:

Mr. Jenkins 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.

Mr. Jenkins testified that he was aware of the Joint Committee's rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Jenkins testified that he was aware of the requirement of reporting campaign expenditures in excess of $100 to the House and Senate Ethics Committees.

(10) Miscellaneous:

Mr. Jenkins meets the constitutional requirements for the office he seeks.


Printed Page 527 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

The Bar found Mr. Jenkins qualified. The Bar reported that Mr. Jenkins "has been a practicing attorney with a broad range of experience as a supervising legal services attorney. While his personal experience in the Family Court has been limited, it is perceived that he will have acceptable knowledge of family law. He gets high marks for his management skills, having planned and implemented innovative methods to improve the delivery of indigent services in Greenville. He is highly respected by his peers and well thought of by the legal and non-legal community. His character, integrity, and reputation are outstanding. It is perceived that Mr. Jenkins would demonstrate excellent judicial temperament without bias in favor of or against any particular person or litigant. He has an excellent demeanor, and it is believed that he would relate well to persons from varied backgrounds appearing before him. He has exhibited a strong work ethic while still serving his community with distinction in other non-legal matters."

Bobby H. Mann, Jr.

Thirteenth Circuit Family Court, Seat 5

Joint Committee's Finding:Qualified

Mr. Mann was screened on December 19, 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:

The Joint Committee's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct.

Mr. Mann demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communication, acceptance of gifts and ordinary social hospitality, and recusal.

(2) Legal Knowledge and Ability:

The Joint Committee found Mr. Mann to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Joint Committee's practice and procedure questions exceeded expectations.

Mr. Mann's Martindale-Hubbell rating is BV.

(3) Professional Experience:

Mr. Mann graduated from the University of South Carolina School of Law in 1984 and was admitted to the Bar later in the same year.


Printed Page 528 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

Mr. Mann has been in general practice since 1984, when he opened a law practice in partnership with Phillip J. Temple. Since that time, 3 other attorneys have joined the practice. Mr. Mann told the Committee that his practice has included litigation, real estate, and family law. He has practiced regularly in the Family Court since 1984 and has handled many cases involving divorce, equitable division, alimony, and custody. Mr. Mann indicated that he has also handled a significant number of adoptions and terminations of parental rights. Since 1984, he has represented abused children for at least one-half day per month. Mr. Mann also reported to the Committee that since 1988, he has been representing Guardian Ad Litems through the Guardian Ad Litem Program.

Mr. Mann described his practice over the past five years as 19% civil, 1% criminal, and 80% domestic.

Mr. Mann provided the Joint Committee with five of his most significant litigated matters which he described as follows:

(a) Traves Tew. v. Cathy Tes, 93-DR-23-4662, change of custody case due to change in material change of circumstances.

(b) Melinda Griggs v. Bethany Christian Services, 90-DR-23-2562, representation of the defendant where the plaintiff (mother) attempted to withdraw her consent for relinquishment of parental rights alleging undue influence and fraud.

(c) Laura Springman v. Shriner's Hospital, WCC File Number 912294, representation of plaintiff in workers' compensation case on issue of whether an internal failure of the knee is an accident as defined by the Workers' Compensation Commission. Appeal by the defense to the full commission and the Circuit Court.

(d) Peter Terwilliger v. Anne Pearl, 93-DR-23-6002, representation of plaintiff uncle who attempted to obtain custody of children against the natural mother (father was deceased).

(e) James and Jill Hood v. SCDSS, 90-DR-23-5305, representation of adoptive parents where primary issue concerned the termination of the birth mother's parental rights as a result of her mental illness.

In response to a request by the Joint Committee, Mr. Mann provided a more extensive list of domestic cases he has handled since he has been in practice. This information was incorporated into the record and was printed in the transcript of Mr. Mann's public hearing.


Printed Page 529 . . . . . Tuesday, February 6, 1996

The Joint Committee determined that Mr. Mann had engaged in an active trial practice in the family courts of South Carolina, marked by a degree of breadth and sophistication.

(4) Judicial Temperament:

The Joint Committee believes that Mr. Mann's temperament would be excellent.

(5) Diligence and Industry:

Mr. Mann 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.

Mr. Mann is married and has two children.

(6) Mental and Physical Capabilities:

Mr. Mann 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. Mr. Mann has managed his financial affairs responsibly.

(8) Public Service:

Mr. Mann is active in professional and community activities.

(9) Ethics:

Mr. Mann 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.

Mr. Mann testified that he was aware of the Joint Committee's rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Mr. Mann testified that he was aware of the requirement of reporting campaign expenditures in excess of $100 to the House and Senate Ethics Committees.

(10) Miscellaneous:

Mr. Mann meets the constitutional requirements for the office he seeks.


| Printed Page 510, Feb. 6 | Printed Page 530, Feb. 6 |

Page Finder Index

This web page was last updated on Monday, June 29, 2009 at 1:59 P.M.