DAVIS v. LEATHERMAN

Opinion No. 27699.

419 S.C. 44 (2017)

796 S.E.2d 137

Tom DAVIS, individually, and as a Citizen, Resident, Taxpayer, Qualified Elector and State Senator of South Carolina, Petitioner, v. Hugh K. LEATHERMAN, Sr., in his capacity as President Pro Tempore of the South Carolina Senate; James H. Lucas, in his capacity as Speaker of the South Carolina House of Representatives and as a member of the Legislative Council; Henry D. McMaster, in his capacity as Lieutenant Governor and President of the South Carolina Senate and as a member of the Legislative Council; Nikki R. Haley, in her capacity as Governor of South Carolina; Alan M. Wilson, in his capacity as Attorney General of the State of South Carolina; Luke A. Rankin, in his capacity as a member of the Legislative Council; F. Gregory Delleney, Jr., in his capacity as a member of the Legislative Council; Mark Hammond, in his capacity as a member of the Legislative Council; and the State of South Carolina, Respondents.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Filed January 18, 2017.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Petitioner Tom Davis, of Beaufort, pro se, Petitioner.

William W. Wilkins , Andrew A. Mathias , and Konstantine P. Diamaduros , all of Greenville and Richard L. Tapp, Jr. , of Charleston, all for Respondents Hugh K. Leatherman, Sr., and Luke A. Rankin.

Patrick G. Dennis , Charles F. Reid , Emma T. Dean , Richard L. Pearce , James H. Goldin , and Roland M. Franklin, Jr. , all of Columbia, for Respondents James H. Lucas and Francis G. Delleney, Jr.

Henry D. McMaster, of Columbia, pro se, Respondent.

Karl S. Bowers, Jr. , and Richele K. Taylor , both of Columbia, for Respondent Nikki R. Haley.

Attorney General Alan M. Wilson , Solicitor General Robert D. Cook , and Deputy Solicitor General J. Emory Smith, Jr. , all of Columbia, for Respondents Alan M. Wilson and the State of South Carolina.

Eugene H. Matthews and Melissa B. Manning , both of Columbia, for Respondent Mark Hammond.

Larry A. Martin, of Pickens, pro se, as Amicus Curiae.


We granted the petition for original jurisdiction in this declaratory judgment matter to consider the questions posed by petitioner of whether "the provisions of Article III and Article IV of the South Carolina Constitution have been amended by virtue of" Act 289 of 2012 and Act 214 of 2014, as well as the vote of the general electorate in...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases