SCLAWYERSWEEKLY.COM VOLUME 19 NUMBER 19 ■
Part of the
network
SEPTEMBER 13, 2021 ■ $8.50
Intent to kill could be inferred from mother’s conduct
HIGH-PROFILE HIGH
SCHOOL FOOTBALL COACH WAS PUBLIC FIGURE
■ BY HEATH HAMACHER hhamacher@sclawyersweekly.com
■ BY HEATH HAMACHER hhamacher@sclawyersweekly.com A jury verdict in favor of a former high school football coach and athletic director who sued his former employer for defamation has been reversed by the South Carolina Court of Appeals, which unanimously ruled that the coach was a public official. As such, the coach had the burden of proving that the district acted with actual malice, and under the state’s Tort Claims Act, school districts are governmental entities that aren’t liable for losses resulting from employee conduct that constitutes actual malice, the court said. It’s the second time in less than two years that the court has sacked a high school football coach’s defamation claim, potentially teeing up the issue to be kicked to the state’s Supreme Court. Jeffrey Cruce was a teacher, head football coach, and athletic director at Berkeley High School in Moncks Corner from 2011 to 2015. Cruce made headlines for his unorthodox tactics, particularly on fourth downs, where eschewed punting in favor of trying for a conversion. The tactics didn’t generate a noticeable improvement in the team’s fortunes, however, and in January 2016 Cruce was removed from his positions and reassigned within the Berkeley County School District as a middle-school guidance counselor. As athletic director, Cruce had
A jury appropriately inferred malice and found specific intent to kill where a Horry County woman wrapped her newborn in a trash bag and threw her in a dumpster, the South Carolina Court of Appeals has unanimously ruled. The question before the court was whether a jury’s ability to deduce malice from a defendant’s conduct is inconsistent with specific intent required for attempted murder. In its Aug. 1 opinion, the appeals court found that it is not, noting that juries are sometimes left with nothing to consider except one’s actions. “After all, actions can speak louder than words,” Judge Blake Hewitt wrote for the court. In April 2015, Shelby Taylor had a daughter in the bathroom of the apartment she shared with her husband and her 16-month-old daughter, both of whom slept through the birth. Taylor, who hid the pregnancy from her family, put the baby inside a trash bag, tied the bag, tossed it in a downstairs dumpster, and cleaned the bathroom. After a nap, Taylor took her other daughter for a wellness checkup and visited her mother. While Taylor was out, two boys found and rescued the baby. A receipt inside the trash bag led police to Taylor, who eventually confessed. At trial, Taylor argued that she didn’t intend to kill her child and that she committed the acts only because she was in a state of transient peripartum psychosis, or temporarily delusional. At trial, an expert testified that this impermanent psychosis began months before the birth and ended after birth,
S e e Co a c h P a g e 5 ► See Intent Page 3 ►
S.C. Supreme Court rejects Columbia’s school mask mandate Associated Press South Carolina’s highest court has tossed out a school mask mandate in the state’s capital city, saying it contradicts a state budget measure aimed at preventing face covering requirements. State Attorney General Alan Wilson had sued the city of Columbia after its City Council passed the ordinance requiring masks at elementary and middle schools. City leaders said the mask requirement, which carries a $100 violation fine, was meant to protect children too young to be approved for the
coronavirus vaccine. But Wilson argued the city’s mask rule conflicts with the budget requirement that went into effect July 1 and bans school districts from using appropriated funds to require face coverings. On Sept. 2, the state Supreme Court sided unanimously with the attorney general. The Columbia ordinance is written so that the burden of enforcing the mask rule falls on school employees, “all of whom have an obvious connection to state-appropriated funds,” wrote Justice John Kittredge. That means school employees have to choose be-
tween violating state or city laws, Kittredge said. “The City has made clear that every school employee is in the crosshairs,” Kittredge wrote. “Simply put, whether intentionally or inadvertently, the City threatens all school personnel with far-reaching and unknown legal liability unless all school personnel ensure obedience to the ordinances.” Attorneys for Columbia had argued days prior that city and school authorities could draw from separate pots of money, such as local funds, to See Mandate Page 3 ►
INSIDE LAW
LAW
LAW
New clinic improves access to justice for homeless
10 ways to practice, promote civility in mediations
Delegating to others can help grow your practice
Page 3
Page 4
Page 4