Could a South Carolina mayor pro tempore also serve as a county deputy coroner?

Plain-English summary

In 2017, a South Carolina House member asked whether one person could serve as a town's mayor pro tempore and a county deputy coroner. The Attorney General reaffirmed its 2001 view that both were offices of honor or profit. It said holding them together violated the state constitution's dual office rule.

The letter noted that the mayor pro tempore and deputy coroner positions were established by statute. It also cautioned about possible common-law master-servant conflicts and directed separate ethical questions to the State Ethics Commission. The AG did not decide a particular ethics complaint.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2017. 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 the two offices be held by the same person?
A: The AG said no; it considered both constitutional offices.

Q: Did the AG change its earlier answer?
A: No. It reaffirmed its 2001 opinion after seeing no basis to overrule it.

Q: Did the opinion decide every possible ethics issue?
A: No. It flagged other possible conflicts for separate consideration.

Background and statutory framework

The AG applied South Carolina's ban on simultaneously holding two offices of honor or profit and its prior classification of each position. It distinguished the constitutional question from separate statutory or ethical restrictions.

Citations and references

• The conclusion said the combination “would violate the South Carolina Constitution's prohibition” on dual office holding.
• The letter identified the mayor pro tempore and deputy coroner statutes while reaffirming its earlier opinion.

Official title

On dual office holding (serves as Mayor pro tem and deputy coroner for a county).

Requester

The Honorable Rick Martin, Member, South Carolina House of Representatives.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/march-24-2017/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Martin-R.-OS-10140-FINAL-Opinion-3-24-2017-01299663xD2C78-01304163xD2C78.pdf

Original opinion text

Alan Wilson
Attorney General

March 24, 2017
The Honorable Rick Martin, Member

South Carolina House of Representatives
District No.40

418-D Blatt Building
Columbia,SC 29201

Dear Representative Martin:
Attorney General Alan Wilson has referred your letter dated March 8, 2017 to the Opinions section for a response. The following is this Office's understanding of your question and our opinion based on that understanding. Issue:

Would serving as both the mayor pro tempore on a town council and deputy county coroner be a conflict? Law/Analysis: As you are aware, the South Carolina Constitution prohibits holding more than one office of honor or profit at one time. S.C. Const. Arts. 6 § 3; 17 § 1 A. This Office has previously answered the question of whether one may serve both as a mayor pro tempore on a municipal council and as a deputy county coroner. See Op. S.C. Atfv Gen.. 2001 WL 129342(S.C.A.G. Januaiy 22,2001). In that opinion, we concluded that both the position of mayor pro tempore and the position of deputy county coroner were offices of honor or profit and that holding both positions would violate the South Carolina Constitution's prohibition of holding more than one office of honor or profit at a time. Id This opinion based its

reasoning on prior opinions that concluded both positions were offices. W. We have included a copy of the 2001 opinion with this letter for your records, and the opinion is available on our website by the date it was issued at www.scag.gov/opinions. As a general rule, this Office recognizes a long-standing tradition that it will not overrule a prior opinion by this Office unless it is clearly erroneous or a change occurred in the applicable law. See, e.g.. Ops. S.C. Attv. Gen.. 2013 WL 6516330 (November 25, 2013); 2013 WL 3762706 (July 1, 2013); 2009 WL 959641 (March 4, 2009); 2006 WL 2849807 (September 29, 2006); 2005 WL 2250210 (September 8, 2005); 1986 WL 289899(October 3, 1986); 1984 WL 249796(April 9, 1984). Thus, in the absence of a change in the law or clear error, we will maintain the same opinion. Nevertheless, we want you to know a mayor pro tempore is an office established by statute (see S.C. Code § 5-7-190) as is the office of deputy coroner (see S.C. Code § 17-5-115, et seq.). This Office still uses the criteria in the Crenshaw case to determine if a position is an office of"honor or profit" for dual office holding purposes. See State V. Crenshaw. 274 S.C. 475. 266 S.E.2d 61 (April 9, 1980). The criteria in Crenshaw consist of four questions, though not all ofthem need to be met to be an office: 1) Was the position created by the General Assembly? 2)Are there established qualifications for appointment? 3) Are duties, tenure, salary, bond and oath required or prescribed? Rembert C. Dennis Building • Post Office Box 11549 • Columbia,SC 29211-1549 • Telephone 803-734-3970 • Facsimile 803-253-6283

The Honorable Rick Martin, Member
Page 2
March 24, 2017

4) Is the position representative of sovereign powers of the State?1

Id.

The law specifically prohibits a mayor from holding any other municipal office or employment,

though we recognize your question involves the position of a deputy county coroner. See S.C. Code Ann.
§ 5-7-180.
Conclusion:

Please review our January 22, 2001 opinion where we concluded that serving as both mayor pro tempore

and a deputy county coroner would violate the South Carolina Constitution's prohibition against holding more than one office of honor or profit at the same time (also referred to as the prohibition of dual office

holding).

Moreover, this Office also must caution against violations of the common law master-servant

principle. See, e.g.. McMahan v. Jones. 94 S.C. 362. 77 S.E. 1022 (1913) (prohibiting one from holding two positions resulting in the same person to be both master and servant in service to the public). Additionally, please consult with the South Carolina Ethics Commission for any questions regarding any potential ethical conflicts.

Nevertheless, this Office is only issuing a legal opinion based on the current

law at this time and the information as provided to us. Until a court or the General Assembly specifically addresses the issues presented in your letter, this is only an opinion on how this Office believes a court would interpret the law in the matter.

Additionally, you may also petition the court for a declaratory

judgment, as only a court of law can interpret statutes and make such determinations. See S.C. Code § 1 5 53-20.

If it is later determined otherwise, or if you have any additional questions or issues, please let us

know.

Sincerely,

(XiA.
Anita (Mardi) S. FailAssistant Attorney General
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

IS.
Robert D. Cook

Solicitor General

The sovereign powers of the State traditionally include taxing, police power and eminent domain. Op. S.C. Atty. Gen.. 2016 WL 4698870 (S.C.A.G. Aug. 24, 2016) (citing Op. S.C.Atfv Gen.. 1996 WL 599391 (September 6,

1 996) (citing Philadelphia Nat. Bank v. U.S. of America. 666 F.2d 834 (3rd Cir. 1 98 1 ))).