Clamp v. Hall, No. 0559

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtGOOLSBY; SANDERS, C.J., and GARDNER
Citation335 S.E.2d 815,287 S.C. 270
PartiesRicky Edward CLAMP, Respondent, v. Vernon HALL and Faye Hall, Appellants. Ex parte Vernon HALL. . Heard
Decision Date16 September 1985
Docket NumberNo. 0559

Page 815

335 S.E.2d 815
287 S.C. 270
Ricky Edward CLAMP, Respondent,
v.
Vernon HALL and Faye Hall, Appellants.
Ex parte Vernon HALL.
No. 0559.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina.
Heard Sept. 16, 1985.
Decided Oct. 14, 1985.

William P. Walker, Jr., Lexington, for appellants.

Jean L. Perrin, of Rogers, Duncan, Fullwood & Perrin, Lexington, for respondent.

Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock and Asst. Atty. Gen. Pope Brooks Shealy, Jr., of Columbia, amicus curiae.

[287 S.C. 271] GOOLSBY, Judge:

The question raised by Vernon Hall in his appeal to this court is whether the family court erred in finding him in contempt of court for refusing to answer questions concerning his knowledge of the whereabouts of his daughter Linda Hall Clamp. Having determined Hall's appeal is now moot, we do not reach this question and remand the case to the family court.

The underlying action to the proceeding in which Hall was cited for contempt was a custody dispute between Hall's daughter and her estranged husband Ricky Clamp over their minor son David. The family court awarded custody of David to Ricky pendente lite. Shortly afterward, Linda took the child and went into hiding. An arrest warrant was issued charging her with commission of the felony of removing a child from the state in violation of a court order. See S.C.Code of Laws § 16-17-495 (1976).

In November, 1982, Ricky joined Hall and Hall's wife as parties to the pending custody action. He served them with a rule to show cause and petition requiring them to appear before the family court and give testimony concerning their knowledge of Linda's and David's whereabouts.

At a hearing held on April 14 and 18, 1983, Ricky's counsel questioned Hall concerning his knowledge of where Linda was

Page 816

staying. Hall refused to answer counsel's questions and asserted the fifth amendment. He contended his answers to questions regarding Linda's whereabouts might tend to incriminate him and lead to his arrest as an accessory to a felony.

The family court found Hall's assertion of the fifth amendment privilege was invalid and held him in contempt. It ordered Hall imprisoned until he purged himself of the contempt by testifying under oath and answering all questions put to him concerning Linda's and David's whereabouts.

The family court's order holding Hall in contempt was thereafter superseded by the Supreme Court. Hall was released[287 S.C. 272] from custody until an appeal from the family court's order adjudging him in contempt could be heard and determined.

Several days after the hearing, law enforcement authorities apprehended Linda and returned David to Ricky's custody. Some months later, Linda and Ricky were divorced, the custody issue was resolved, and the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • In re Bible, Bankruptcy No. 90-10048.
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Eleventh Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of Georgia
    • February 23, 1990
    ...the process of the court, interference with property in the custody of the law, misconduct of officers of the court. . . ." Clamp v. Hall, 287 S.C. 270, 335 S.E.2d 815 (Ct.App.1985) quoting State v. Nathans, 49 S.C. 199, 207, 27 S.E. 52, 55 (1896). "Sanctions for contempt, of course, may en......
  • Checker Yellow Cab Co., Inc. v. Checker Cab and Parcel Service, Inc., No. 0604
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • November 12, 1985
    ...a final disposition of the cause in which the contempt occurred [ see Brunson v. Brunson, 91 S.C. 411, 74 S.E. 928 (1912); Clamp v. Hall, 335 S.E.2d 815 (S.C.Ct.App.1985) ], criminal contempt proceedings are not ordinarily abated by the termination of the main action. 17 C.J.S. Contempt § 6......
2 cases
  • In re Bible, Bankruptcy No. 90-10048.
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Eleventh Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of Georgia
    • February 23, 1990
    ...of the court, interference with property in the custody of the law, misconduct of officers of the court. . . ." Clamp v. Hall, 287 S.C. 270, 335 S.E.2d 815 (Ct.App.1985) quoting State v. Nathans, 49 S.C. 199, 207, 27 S.E. 52, 55 (1896). "Sanctions for contempt, of course, may enta......
  • Checker Yellow Cab Co., Inc. v. Checker Cab and Parcel Service, Inc., No. 0604
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • November 12, 1985
    ...a final disposition of the cause in which the contempt occurred [ see Brunson v. Brunson, 91 S.C. 411, 74 S.E. 928 (1912); Clamp v. Hall, 335 S.E.2d 815 (S.C.Ct.App.1985) ], criminal contempt proceedings are not ordinarily abated by the termination of the main action. 17 C.J.S. Contempt § 6......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT