Home > Agenda

2009 Issue Agenda

I. Comprehensive Legal Reform Legislation

Admissibility in Civil Actions of Nonuse of Seat Belt Act

1. allows the non-use of seat belts to be admissible in civil cases to reduce damages if injury was caused by failure to wear a seat belt

Appeal Bond Waiver Act

            In civil cases, defendants are required to post a supersedeas bond before being permitted to appeal a court decision. In cases with extreme verdicts, a high bond effectively eliminates defendants’ fundamental right to appeal.

1. limits supersedeas bond to $25 Million
2. limits supersedeas bond to $1 Million for small businesses

Class Actions Improvements Act

1. models Federal Court Rule 23
2. appellate review of certification of classes
3. limits class actions to residents of our state in most cases

Full and Fair NonEconomic Damages Act

1. establishes legal guides for pain and suffering awards
2. includes judicial review of awards
3. provides for a reasonable limit of $350,000 for awards

Private Attorney Retention Sunshine Act (PARSA)

             SCCJC is seeking to provide accountability and standards for the hiring of outside legal counsel by the State of South Carolina.

Punitive Damages Standards Act

1. limits awards to 2 times compensatory damages or $250,000 whichever is greater
2. limits awards to 2 times compensatory damages or $250,000 whichever is less for small businesses

Regulatory Compliance Congruity With Liability Act

The purpose of this legislation is to promote congruity between a state’s regulatory system and civil justice system making sure these two important areas of law do not work against each other.

Under the act, if a product or service is in compliance with regulatory standards or approved by a government agency, the manufacturer is not subject to claims provided the product or service was in line with pertinent government regulations.

Economic Loss Rule

The South Carolina Supreme Court recently reversed longstanding jurisprudence in Colleton Prep Academy v. Hoover Universal by adding a broad exception to the economic loss rule by creating a legal duty in tort for manufacturers even when a product does not cause any bodily harm.

Our legislation seeks to re-instate the longstanding economic loss rule that was the legal standard prior to the Colleton Prep Academy v. Hoover Universal decision.

Statute of Repose

When a person has committed fraud, gross negligence, or recklessness, the current Statute of Repose provides that the 8 years limitation (13 years for cases filed before 2005 reforms went into effect) is not available as a defense in construction cases.

Some trial lawyers are alleging that a building code violation is enough evidence to indicate recklessness or gross negligence in cases that otherwise exceeds the limitations of the Statute of Repose.

SCCJC is proposing a clarifying clause to be added to Section 15-3-670 stating that a possible building code violation is not deemed gross negligence or recklessness per se. This clarification should stop plaintiffs’ attorneys from citing building code violations to circumvent the limitations of the Statute of Repose.

Piercing the Corporate Veil

On November 3, 2008, the SC Supreme Court in Drury Development v. Foundation Insurance refused to adopt a rule preventing the piercing of the corporate veil until judgment has been obtained by the plaintiff.

SCCJC believes that this decision will lead to abuse in discovery and increase litigation costs.

Our coalition proposes that no claim or discovery may seek to pierce (lift) the corporate veil until the plaintiff has obtained a judgment against a company.

The piercing of the corporate veil is a legal decision providing that shareholders and directors are personally liable for the debts and liability of their corporation.

Consumer Protection Act

The Consumer Protection Act should be amended to include a compliance exemption relating to the Federal Trade Commission, limiting damages to out-of-pocket losses, and clarification of the causation and proof requirements to recover damages under the CPA.

II. Workers’ Compensation

1. conduct a study of Workers’ Compensation Commissioners’ awards
2. introduce objective standards legislation after the study is completed

III. Expert Evidence

1. continue to support the SC Supreme Court’s proposed rule on expert evidence
2. if the Supreme Court fails to adopt meaningful expert evidence reform, include expert evidence reform in the 2009 comprehensive legal reform legislation

IV. Anti-Business and Pro-Lawsuit Legislation

• oppose legislation that increases litigation and costs to the business community
• oppose legislation harmful to our legal climate