Paschal v. State Election Com'n, No. 24197
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | WALLER; CHANDLER, C.J., FINNEY and MOORE, JJ., and M.D. SHULER |
| Citation | 317 S.C. 434,454 S.E.2d 890 |
| Parties | H.W. Pat PASCHAL, Jr. as Chairman of the Greenville County Democratic Party and the Greenville County Democratic Party, Respondents, v. The STATE of South Carolina ELECTION COMMISSION, Appellant. . Heard |
| Docket Number | No. 24197 |
| Decision Date | 07 December 1994 |
Page 890
Democratic Party and the Greenville County
Democratic Party, Respondents,
v.
The STATE of South Carolina ELECTION COMMISSION, Appellant.
Decided Feb. 13, 1995.
Rehearing Denied March 27, 1995.
Page 891
[317 S.C. 435] N. Heyward Clarkson, III and E. Scott Sanders, Gibbes & Clarkson, P.A., Greenville, for appellant.
Michael Parham, Parham and Smith, Greenville, for respondents.
WALLER, Justice:
The State Election Commission (SEC) appeals an order granting Respondent, H.W. Pat Paschal, Chairman of the Greenville County Democratic Party (Paschal), summary judgment. At issue is whether filing fees paid by unopposed political candidates, whose names were not listed on the ballot for the November, 1992 election, are to be retained by the SEC or the Greenville Democratic Party.
Paschal collected fees from fifteen candidates running for political office in the November, 1992 election. He forwarded a total of $8644.88 to the SEC as filing fees for all fifteen candidates[317 S.C. 436] . Eight of the candidates were unopposed and their names were therefore not listed on the ballot. Thereafter, Paschal demanded the SEC return the filing fees of the eight candidates whose names did not appear on the ballot. The SEC refused, and Paschal instituted this action. Both sides moved for summary judgment. The trial court held that S.C.Code Ann. § 7-13-40 (Supp.1993) did not require transmittal of filing fees of candidates whose names did not appear on the ballot and, therefore, ordered the SEC to return the filing fees paid by Paschal.
Does S.C.Code Ann. § 7-13-40 (Supp.1993) entitle the SEC to retain filing fees of unopposed political candidates whose names do not appear on the ballots to be voted in primary elections?
S.C.Code Ann. § 7-13-40 (Supp.1993) provides, in part:
The filing fees for candidates whose names are on ballots to be voted on in
Page 892
all primaries, 1 except municipal primaries, must be transmitted by the respective political parties to the State Election Commission and placed by the executive director ... in a special account designated for use in conducting the primaries and must be used for that purpose. (Emphasis supplied).If a statute's language is plain and unambiguous, and conveys a clear and definite meaning, there is no occasion for employing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sloan v. Greenville County, No. 3704.
...has no right to impose another meaning. Hodges v. Rainey, 341 S.C. 79, 85, 533 S.E.2d 578, 581 (2000); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 454 S.E.2d 890 (1995); Georgia-Carolina Bail Bonds, 354 S.C. at 24, 579 S.E.2d at By its plain meaning, section 7-238 affords the County no ......
-
Thompson ex rel. Harvey v. Cisson Const., No. 4339.
...or impose another meaning. Tilley v. Pacesetter Corp., 355 S.C. 361, 373, 585 S.E.2d 292, 298 (2003); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 436, 454 S.E.2d 890, 892 (1995); see also City of Camden v. Brassell, 326 S.C. 556, 561, 486 S.E.2d 492, 495 (Ct.App.1997) ("Where the langua......
-
Bass v. Isochem, No. 3996.
...to look for or impose another meaning. Tilley v. Pacesetter Corp., 355 S.C. 361, 585 S.E.2d 292 (2003); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 454 S.E.2d 890 (1995); see also City of Camden v. Brassell, 326 S.C. 556, 561, 486 S.E.2d 492, 495 (Ct.App.1997) ("Where the language of th......
-
State v. Brannon, No. 4428.
...or impose another meaning. Tilley v. Pacesetter Corp., 355 S.C. 361, 373, 585 S.E.2d 292, 298 (2003); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 436, 454 S.E.2d 890, 892 (1995). What a legislature says in the text of a statute is considered the best evidence of the legislative intent o......
-
Sloan v. Greenville County, No. 3704.
...has no right to impose another meaning. Hodges v. Rainey, 341 S.C. 79, 85, 533 S.E.2d 578, 581 (2000); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 454 S.E.2d 890 (1995); Georgia-Carolina Bail Bonds, 354 S.C. at 24, 579 S.E.2d at By its plain meaning, section 7-238 affords the County no ......
-
Thompson ex rel. Harvey v. Cisson Const., No. 4339.
...or impose another meaning. Tilley v. Pacesetter Corp., 355 S.C. 361, 373, 585 S.E.2d 292, 298 (2003); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 436, 454 S.E.2d 890, 892 (1995); see also City of Camden v. Brassell, 326 S.C. 556, 561, 486 S.E.2d 492, 495 (Ct.App.1997) ("Where the langua......
-
Bass v. Isochem, No. 3996.
...to look for or impose another meaning. Tilley v. Pacesetter Corp., 355 S.C. 361, 585 S.E.2d 292 (2003); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 454 S.E.2d 890 (1995); see also City of Camden v. Brassell, 326 S.C. 556, 561, 486 S.E.2d 492, 495 (Ct.App.1997) ("Where the language of th......
-
State v. Brannon, No. 4428.
...or impose another meaning. Tilley v. Pacesetter Corp., 355 S.C. 361, 373, 585 S.E.2d 292, 298 (2003); Paschal v. State Election Comm'n, 317 S.C. 434, 436, 454 S.E.2d 890, 892 (1995). What a legislature says in the text of a statute is considered the best evidence of the legislative intent o......