South Carolina Dept. of Mental Health v. Hanna, 20602

Decision Date09 February 1978
Docket NumberNo. 20602,20602
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesSOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, Appellant, v. Murdock HANNA, Individually, and as Committee for Davis Hanna, a person non compos mentis, and Davis Hanna, a person non compos mentis, Respondents.

Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod and Larry W. Propes, Columbia, for appellant.

Thomas E. Smith, Jr., of Nettles, Thomy & Smith, Pamplico, for respondent Murdock Hanna.

Saunders M. Bridges, Jr., of Bridges & Whisenhunt, Florence, Guardian ad Litem for Davis Hanna.

NESS, Justice:

This appeal is from an order sustaining a demurrer to an action to remove Murdock Hanna as committee for Davis Hanna, and appoint a new committee. We reverse.

Davis Hanna was a patient in a State mental health facility from July 1917 until January 8th, 1974 when he was discharged to a Florence nursing home. Respondent Murdock Hanna, son of the patient, was appointed committee on November 1, 1955, and has continued to serve in that capacity until the present. Respondent has never filed an Inventory, Return or Accounting of the patient's property despite repeated demands by the appellant. Section 44-23-780 of the Code of Laws of South Carolina (1976) mandates the committee of a mentally ill person to make an annual accounting to the probate judge of the county where the mentally ill person resides. Further, it provides for the discharge of a committee who fails to make such an accounting after its due date and a demand by the Commission.

By Summons and Complaint dated July 18, 1973, the Department commenced an action against Murdock Hanna to require him to file a proper inventory of all the property owned by Davis Hanna. That action was dismissed without prejudice when the circuit court determined that jurisdiction of the matter was properly in the probate court. See Tucker v. Tucker, 264 S.C. 172, 213 S.E.2d 588 (1975).

By Summons and Notice to Procure a Guardian ad Litem and Petition dated November 12, 1975, the Department commenced the present action. Respondent demurred on the ground the patient had been discharged in January of 1974. Respondent's demurrer was sustained by both the probate and circuit courts.

The ostensible purpose of Code Section 44-23-780 is to protect an incompetent person from a self-serving committee. Such protection would be easily thwarted if fiduciaries could remove their wards from Department facilities to avoid an accounting. A remedial statute should be liberally construed in order to effectuate its purpose. See 50 Am.Jur., Statute, § 395; 44 C.J.S. Insane Persons § 47; Inabinet v. Royal Exchange Assurance of London et al., 165 S.C. 33, 162 S.E. 599 (1932). Accordi...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Crosby v. Glasscock Trucking Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • May 22, 2000
    ...As with any remedial statute, we are bound to construe the law liberally to effectuate its purpose. South Carolina Dep't of Mental Health v. Hanna, 270 S.C. 210, 241 S.E.2d 563 (1978). I believe an interpretation of "person" that includes life from the point of conception is necessary to ma......
  • Sloan v. Greenville County
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • December 8, 2003
    ...in nature, and its provisions should be construed liberally to carry out its purposes. See South Carolina Dep't of Mental Health v. Hanna, 270 S.C. 210, 213, 241 S.E.2d 563, 564 (1978) ("A remedial statute should be liberally construed in order to effectuate its purpose."); Spencer v. Barnw......
  • Campbell v. Marion County Hosp. Dist.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • March 31, 2003
    ...by the legislature. Quality Towing, Inc. v. City of Myrtle Beach, 345 S.C. 156, 547 S.E.2d 862 (2001); South Carolina Dep't of Mental Health v. Hanna, 270 S.C. 210, 241 S.E.2d 563 (1978). Section 30-4-30(a) of the South Carolina Code provides: "Any person has a right to inspect or copy any ......
  • Sloan Const. v. Southco Grassing
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • March 24, 2008
    ...held that such remedial statutes should be liberally construed in order to effectuate their purpose. S.C. Dept. of Mental Health v. Hanna, 270 S.C. 210, 213, 241 S.E.2d 563, 564 (1978). The statutory terms which tend to distinguish the SPPA from the Little Miller Acts likewise demonstrate t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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