South Carolina Dept. of Social Services v. Flemming.

Decision Date16 May 1978
Docket NumberNo. 20689,20689
Citation271 S.C. 15,244 S.E.2d 517
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesSOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Appellant, v. Daniel FLEMMING, Respondent.

Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod and Asst. Attys. Gen. Raymond G. Halford, W. Joseph Isaacs and Nan L. Black and Staff Atty. Frank H. DuRant, Columbia, for appellant.

Robert L. Hallman, Jr., Columbia, for respondent.

LEWIS, Chief Justice.

Appellant, as assignee of the support rights of a minor child, brought this action against respondent to establish paternity of the child and to enforce support. Respondent admitted sexual relations with the mother but asserted sterility as a defense. In the trial, the lower court admitted into evidence, over objection, a written statement by a doctor, not called as a witness, that he examined respondent in 1976 and, in his opinion, respondent was sterile. Upon the basis of this statement, the lower court concluded that respondent was sterile in 1972, when the child was conceived and, therefore, could not have been the father. Appellant, among other grounds of appeal, asserts that the admission of the foregoing statement of the doctor constituted prejudicial error. We agree. Our conclusion that the statement was inadmissible requires a new trial and renders consideration of other questions unnecessary.

The trial judge relied upon Rule 18(c) of the Rules of Practice in the Family Court as the basis for his ruling that the doctor's written statement or report was admissible. This was error. Rule 18, in its entirety, is as follows:

The following documents and written statements shall be admissible in evidence without requiring that the person or institution issuing the documents or statements be present in Court:

(a) A written statement of a child's attendance at school, signed by a school principal or duly authorized school official.

(b) The school report card showing the child's record of attendance, grades on subjects taught and other pertinent information, provided that this be a report sent out at periodic intervals by the school.

(c) The written statement by a physician showing that the patient was treated at certain times and the type of ailment.

(d) The written report of the Department of Social Services or other agency, reporting the home investigation or any other report required by the Court.

(e) The written statement of an employer showing wages either weekly or monthly for a given period of time and W-2 statement, income...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Saj v. Saj
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 23 d3 Dezembro d3 2015
    ... ... 2015-UP-571Court of Appeals of South CarolinaDecember 23, 2015 ... Dep't of Soc. Servs. v ... Flemming, 271 S.C. 15, 17, 244 S.E.2d 517, 518 (1978) ... ...
  • Saj v. Saj, Appellate Case No. 2015-001329
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 23 d3 Dezembro d3 2015
    ...by a physician showing that the patient was treated at certain times and the type of ailment."); S.C. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Flemming, 271 S.C. 15, 17, 244 S.E.2d 517, 518 (1978) ("Rule [7](c), here in question, permits the reception of a physician's written statement that the patient was ......
  • Kershaw County Dept. of Social Services v. McCaskill
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • 5 d4 Outubro d4 1978
    ...the admissibility of her 332 page file from the South Carolina School for the Deaf and Blind. In S. C. Department of Social Services v. Flemming, 271 S.C. 15, 244 S.E.2d 517 (1978), we held Family Court Rule 18 did not supplant the substantive rules of evidence and could not be used to depr......

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