What happened if a South Carolina magistrate failed certification in 1995?

Short answer The 1995 informal opinion said failure to meet the applicable magistrate training or examination requirements declared the office vacant under the statute. It described notice to the magistrate and governor and appointment of a successor, with no holdover.
State
South Carolina
Opinion
1995-june-21-1995-1
Issued
June 21, 1995
Issued by
Office of the South Carolina Attorney General
Requested by
The Honorable R.L. McElveen, Magistrate, Lake City District

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1995. 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 AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent.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)

Official title

Asking what happens when magistrates fail to pass the test for their certification.

Requester

The Honorable R.L. McElveen, Magistrate, Lake City District

Plain-English summary

A magistrate asked what happened when magistrates failed the certification test. The 1995 informal opinion quoted the then-applicable training and examination provisions and said noncompliance led to a vacancy, on the earlier of the applicable deadline or the specified notice. It described written notice from the Supreme Court or its designee to the affected magistrate and governor for the certification circumstances addressed by the quoted subsection. The magistrate did not hold over, and the governor appointed a successor in the legally prescribed manner. The letter identified Rule 509, SCACR, as governing the procedure and enclosed that rule and a sample notice.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995. 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: Could a magistrate continue holding over after the stated certification failure? A: The quoted provision said no: upon the specified written notice the office was vacant and the magistrate did not hold over.

Q: Who received notice of the failure?
A: The quoted provision identified the affected magistrate and the governor as recipients of written notice from the Supreme Court or its designee.

Q: Who appointed a successor?
A: The letter quoted the statute directing the governor to appoint a successor in the manner provided by law.

Background and statutory framework

The letter quoted the then-applicable magistrate training, initial certification, and recertification rules, including their vacancy consequences. The source text’s printed section number is imperfectly extracted, so this summary does not restate it.

Citations and references

  • Rule 509, SCACR, identified in the letter as governing the certification procedure.

Source

Original opinion text

..

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES MOLONY CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

June 21, 1995

The Honorable R. L. McElveen
Magistrate, Lake City District
Post Office Box 1463
Lake City, South Carolina 29560
Re: Informal Opinion
Dear Judge McElveen:
Attorney General Condon has referred your letter to me for reply. You have asked what happens when magistrates fail to pass the test for their certification. S.C. Code Ann. Sec. 22-1-lO(e) provides as follows:
[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the terms and qualifications of magistrates: (1) All magistrates shall complete a training program or pass certification or recertification examinations, or both pursuant to standards established by the Supreme Court of South Carolina. The examination must be offered at least three times each year. Subsections (a), (b) and (c) set forth a schedule for magistrates in the various counties. Subsection (d) states:
[e]very magistrate shall pass a recertification examination within eight years after passing the initial certification examination, and at least once every eight years thereafter. REMBERT

c. DENNIS BL'ILDl:-;G

•

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA,

s.c. 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE:

803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

The Honorable R. L. McElveen
Page 2
June 21, 1995
Non-compliance is addressed in Subsection (2). Such provision is as follows:
[i]f any magistrate does not comply with these training or examination requirements, his office is declared vacant on the date the time expires, or when he is notified, as provided in subsection (D), whichever is earlier. Subsection (D) provides:
[u]pon written notification of the Supreme Court or its designee to the affected magistrate and the Governor of the failure of the magistrate to complete the training program or pass the certification examination required pursuant to subsection (c), the magistrate's office is declared vacant, the magistrate does not hold over, and the Governor shall appoint a successor in the manner provided by law. (emphasis added). This procedure is governed by Rule 509, SCACR (South Carolina Appellate Court Rules). I am enclosing copies of Rule 509 as well as a sample letter from the Board of Magistrate Certification. If you have any additional questions, I suggest you might contact Bob McCurdy at Court Administration. His telephone number is (803) 734-1800. His mailing address is Post Office Box 50447, Columbia, SC 29250. This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Assistant Deputy Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific questions asked. It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. With kind regards, I am Very truly yours,
/

1

,

/~'J'---

Robert D. Cook
Assistant Deputy Attorney General
RDC/an
Enclosures

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

This opinion is from 1995. 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