Did a South Carolina public hospital district need the AG’s approval to sell a hospital?

Short answer The AG said it knew of no provision requiring AG notice, approval, consent or review for a sale by the described public hospital corporation. The opinion relied on the district being formed under the regional health services statutes, not the Nonprofit Corporation Act.
State
South Carolina
Opinion
2004-july-12-2004-3
Issued
July 12, 2004
Issued by
Office of the South Carolina Attorney General
Requested by
The Honorable Glenn Reese, Member, SC Senate

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2004. Ask about yours and see what current South Carolina law means for your facts, with citations you can check.

Disclaimer: This is an official South Carolina Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Consult a licensed South Carolina attorney for advice on your specific situation.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official AG opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original AG opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A senator asked whether Spartanburg Regional Health Services District could dispose of B.J. Workman Memorial Hospital without notifying or obtaining approval from the Attorney General. The requester described the district as a public hospital corporation created under the regional health services laws, not as a corporation under the South Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act. On that premise, the Attorney General said it knew of no provision requiring its notification, prior approval, consent or other review of the proposed disposition.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2004. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did the district need the AG's approval for the hospital sale described?
A: The 2004 opinion identified no such AG approval or notification requirement for the public hospital corporation as described.

Q: Why did the nonprofit corporation notice provisions not decide the question?
A: The requester said the district was created under the public health services district provisions rather than the Nonprofit Corporation Act. The AG answered on that premise.

Q: Did the opinion approve a particular buyer or sale contract?
A: No. It addressed only whether an AG notice, approval, consent or review requirement applied to the proposed disposal.

Background and statutory framework

The letter contrasted regional health services district provisions in Title 44 with notification rules described under the Nonprofit Corporation Act. It found no indication that the AG had oversight authority over the public hospital district's proposed sale under the provisions discussed.

Citations

  • Sections 33-31-101 et seq.

Source

Original opinion text

f

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
HENRY McMAsrER
ATIDRNEY GENERAL

July 12, 2004

I
I
I

The Honorable Glen.'n Reese
Senator, District No. 11
507 Fagan Drive, Lake Bowen
Inman, South Carolina 29349-7000
Dear Senator Reese:
In a letter to this office you indicated that the Spartanburg Regional Health Services District, Inc. ("SRHS") is a public hospital corporation created by the Spartanburg County Council under Title 44, Chapter 7, Articles 15and.16 of the South Carolina Code dealing with regional health services districts. You specifically indicated that SRHS is not a nonprofit corporation pursuant to the South Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act, S.C. Code Ann. Sections 33-31-101 et seq. (Supp. 2003). You have indicated that SRHS is considering disposing of one of its properties, BJ. Workman Memorial Hospital. In a memorandum forwarded with your letter, SRHS's legal counsel referenced that under the Nonprofit Corporation Act, nonprofit corporations are required to notify the Attorney General of certain mergers, sales and distributions of assets. See: Sections 33-31-.1.102, 33-31-1202 (f), and 33-31-1403. You have questioned whether SRHS may sell, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose ofB.J. Workman Memorial Hospital without notification to, the prior approval or consent of, or other review by the Attorney General's office. I am unaware of any provisions requiring the notification, prior approval, consent, or other review by the Attorney General of the sale, transfer, conveyance or other disposal of a public hospital corporation created pursuant to Title 44, Chapter 7, Articles 15 and 16. I agree with the statement of SRHS 's legal counsel that there are no indications in such

I

/)

RE1jBERTJI:.D.!6iws.BlJILD1NG • Posr0mcEBoxll549 • COLUMBIA,S.C.29211-1549 • TELEPHONE:803-734-3970 • FACSIMILE:803-253-6283

N_j /l./, /,1 r

( 'V',---;-H-r ~

I'

•1.i-

r

I

The Honorable Glenn Reese
Page 2
July 12, 2004

provisions· that the Attorney General has oversight or other authority over regional health s.ervices districts. With kind regards, I am,

I
I

Very truly yours,

CJ.~4~12
.J,.,.L_
Charles H. Richardson
Senior Assistant Attorney General

I
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

/iz_~16£-

~

RObertD.co;i(

Assistant Deputy Attorney General

What does South Carolina law say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2004. Ezel checks the current South Carolina statutes and case law, applies them to your situation, and cites what it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace