H 3530 — Magistrates' Reform Act

Under the bill, the Senate is required to forward prospective magistrate candidates to the JMSC for review in the same manner as other judicial vacancies.

A report by JMSC must then be submitted to the Senate and the Governor prior to the Governor's appointment.

Currently, senatorial delegations determine the individuals to be recommended to the Governor for appointment pursuant to Section 22-2-10, or a nonpartisan preferential election is held pursuant to Section 22-2-15, both of which are repealed by the bill.

This bill specifies that a magistrate may serve in a holdover capacity for no more than days from the expiration of his term, and the Governor may make a temporary appointment if the Senate has not given advice and consent for a new appointment within this holdover timeframe.

The bill adds the requirement that beginning July 1, 2025, a magistrate appointee must have received a juris doctor degree and be a member in good standing with the South Carolina Bar.

The bill increases the concurrent civil jurisdiction of magistrates from the current $7,500 limit for civil claims to claims not to exceed $25,000.

The bill also increases the limits on criminal cases that magistrates may hear from the current fine or forfeiture limit of $500 or imprisonment of no more than 30 days to up to $25,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 year.

  Judicial.

The bill expands concurrent jurisdiction for magistrate court for certain civil actions and criminal actions.

Judicial reports that from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025, there were 6,886 misdemeanors disposed of in general sessions court, which would have been eligible for disposition in magistrate court under this bill.

However, Judicial states that increasing magistrate-level criminal jurisdiction could result in more cases appealed to the circuit court.

Judicial is further unable to estimate the number of plaintiffs who filed civil cases in the court of common pleas that would now choose to file a civil case in magistrate court.

Since jurisdiction remains concurrent, Judicial indicates that it is possible that litigants would choose to continue to pursue relief in the court of common pleas.

For plaintiffs who file cases in magistrate courts, an appeal would go to circuit court, thus further increasing the number of cases handled circuit court in its appellate capacity.

While the potential change in the number of cases is unknown, Judicial currently anticipates that the caseload can be managed within existing appropriations.

  House of Representatives and the Senate.

The House of Representatives and the Senate indicate that the requirements of the bill, including JMSC review of prospective magistrate candidates, will be managed under normal operations for the legislative bodies.

Therefore, this bill will have no impact on the House of Representatives or the Senate.

  State Revenue This bill may impact fine and fee revenue, depending on the number of cases that shift to magistrates court under the expanded civil and criminal jurisdiction.

Court fines and fees are distributed to the General Fund, Other Funds, and local funds.

Therefore, this bill may result in a change to General Fund and Other Funds revenue depending on the change in fines and fees collected.

  Local Expenditure This bill makes several changes to the appointment process, requirements, and jurisdiction of magistrates in the state.

The bill increases concurrent civil jurisdiction for magistrate court from $7,500 to 25,000 and provides jurisdiction for all criminal offenses with fine or forfeiture of no more than $25,000 or imprisonment for no more than 1 year, an increase from current limits of $500 or imprisonment for no more than days.

RFA surveyed all counties in the state and received responses from Charleston, Horry, Cherokee, Lancaster, and Edgefield Counties on the potential fiscal impact of this bill.

All responding counties indicate that the increased jurisdiction under the bill would increase the number of cases heard in magistrates court and likely require additional personnel and expanded court operations to handle the increased caseload.

Horry County estimates that an additional magistrate office would need to be established, at an additional cost of $1,450,000 in FY 2026-27 and $450,000 in each year thereafter for three additional personnel.

Charleston, Cherokee, Lancaster, and Edgefield Counties all expressed concerns regarding the impact that increasing the jurisdiction on caseloads as well as the impact that requiring magistrates to obtain a juris doctor degree would have on the county's ability to replace magistrates when vacancies arise due to the disparity in current magistrate compensation when compared to other judicial and legal roles that require a juris doctor degree.

As a result, the responding counties indicate that compensation for magistrates would likely need to increase, further increasing the local expenditure impact of the bill.

    Frank A.

Rainwater, Executive Director Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office   _______                 A bill   TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ADDING SECTION 2-19-115 SO AS TO REQUIRE CANDIDATES FOR MAGISTRATE POSITIONS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE JUDICIAL MERIT SELECTION COMMISSION IN THE SAME MANNER AS OTHER JUDICIAL CANDIDATES UPON VACANCIES, AND TO DEFINE WHEN VACANCIES OCCUR;

----XX---- This web page was last updated on FebruaryDecember 05,06, 20262024 at 03:2412:21 PM