Who interpreted “similar disability” for South Carolina head and spinal cord injury case-management eligibility?

Plain-English summary

A senator asked how the Department of Disabilities and Special Needs should understand “similar disability” in the statute governing Head and Spinal Cord Injury Division case-management services. The Attorney General did not decide whether the constituent had a qualifying disability. Instead, the opinion said the department was responsible for administering the statute and determining eligibility. Its reasonable reading of “similar disability” would receive respectful consideration from courts and the AG's office, even if another interpretation was possible.

The quoted eligibility provision required a severe chronic limitation attributable to head or spinal cord injury, or a similar physical disability, while excluding conditions associated with certain progressive or age-related processes. The opinion identified that text and the department's decision role but did not supply an independent medical definition for the disputed phrase.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998. 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 opinion decide who qualified as having a “similar disability”?
A: No. It addressed who interpreted the eligibility criterion and the deference given to a reasonable departmental interpretation.

Q: Who determined case-management eligibility under the cited law?
A: The opinion said the Department of Disabilities and Special Needs determined eligibility under the statutory criteria.

Q: Was the department's interpretation automatically binding on a court?
A: The opinion said a reasonable agency interpretation would receive respectful consideration and would not be overturned absent compelling reasons. It did not say every interpretation had to be accepted.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion described the state's service system for people with head and spinal cord injuries, the department's assessment and case-management duties, and Section 44-38-370's eligibility language. Its answer concerned administrative interpretation rather than the facts of the constituent's condition.

Citations and references

• Section 44-38-370, the eligibility provision quoted by the opinion.
• § 44-38-310, the service-system provision discussed by the opinion.

Official title

Interpreting Section 44-38-370 of the South Carolina Code of Laws, which establishes eligibility criteria for case management services through the Department of Disabilities and Special Needs (hereinafter the “Department”).

Requester

The Honorable Joe Wilson, Senator, District No. 23

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/september-17-1998/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/98sept17wilson.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES M. CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

September 17, 1998

The Honorable Joe Wilson
Senator, District No. 23
P.O. Box 5709
West Columbia, South Carolina 29171

Re:

Informal Opinion

Dear Senator Wilson:
Your opinion request has been forwarded to me for reply. You have asked, on behalf of one of your constituents, for an interpretation of Section 44-38-370 of the South Carolina Code of Laws, which establishes eligibility criteria for case management services through the Department of Disabilities and Special Needs (hereinafter the "Department"), Head and Spinal Cord Injury Division. You have asked a question concerning the Department's interpretation of the phrase "similar disability" when determining whether an individual is eligible for services under the statute. By way of background, there is established within the Department of Disabilities and Special Needs the South Carolina Head and Spinal Cord Injury Service Delivery System. The system is a division of the Department to be known as the Head and Spinal Cord Injury Division. The Department is obligated under the statute to develop, coordinate, and enhance the delivery of services to persons with head and spinal injuries. S.C. Code Ann. § 44-38-310. Section 44-38-340 sets forth the duties of the Department under the statute. This Section provides, among other things, that the Department shall determine a person's eligibility for case management services based on criteria provided in Section 44-38-370, conduct an assessment of services needed, and provide appropriate case management based

The Honorable Joe Wilson
Page 2
September 17, 1998
on an individualized treatment plan designed to meet the specific needs of the person. 1 The eligibility criteria found in Section 44-38-370 is, in part, as follows: A person is eligible for case management services under this article when at the time of determining eligibility the person has a severe chronic limitation that: ( 1) is attributed to a physical impairment, including head injury, spinal cord injury, or both, or a similar disability, regardless of the age of onset but not associated with the process of a progressive degenerative illness or disease, dementia, or a neurological disorder related to aging (emphasis added); In regards to an agency's interpretation of a statute, so long as the administrative interpretation is reasonable, courts will defer to that construction even if it is not the only reasonable one or the one the court could have adopted in the first instance. Op. Atty. Gen. dated March 12, 1997. The construction given to a statute by the agency charged with its administration will be accorded most respectful consideration and will not be overturned absent compelling reasons. Laurens Co. School Districts 55 and 56 v. Cox, 308 S.C. 171, 417 S.E.2d 560 (1992); Jasper Co. Tax Assessor v. Westvaco, 305 S.C. 346, 409 S.E.2d 333 (1991).

r

!

Here, the Department is the agency responsible for the administration of the statute. The Department is charged with determining a person's eligibility for case management services based on the criteria set forth in the statute. The law also provides that the director of the Department or his designee has the final authority over applicant eligibility, determination, or services and admission order, subject to the policies adopted by the commission. Due to the Department's role in this matter, its interpretation of the phrase "similar disability" would be entitled to most respectful consideration by the courts and this Office and would not be overturned absent compelling reasons. Further, as long as the Department's interpretation is reasonable, the courts and this Office will defer to that construction.

1

The law also provides that the director of the Department or his designee has the final authority over applicant eligibility, determination, or services and admission order, subject to policies adopted by the commission. S.C. Code Ann. ~ 44-20-430.

The Honorable Joe Wilson
Page 3
September 17, 1998
This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated assistant 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 kindest regards, I remain Very truly yours,

I
I

r~
!

El;/;(..<

Paul M. Koch
Assistant Attorney General