Sic Set To Sue Over “Heroin User” Accusation

By Believe It Not (a.k.a. Sic Willie's Stalker) on June 8th, 2008 at 1:14 pm

Strange that will has been so very silent on this question:

will, have you ever used any illegal drug or illegal substance(s) and/or illegally or improperly used any legal or illegal drug or substance?

By Andy Griffith on June 8th, 2008 at 1:33 pm

Will:

Seriously here for a second. How to you provide “irrefutable proof” to disprove a negative for all time?

That ain’t logical boy. Do you really think on that low of a level?

Andy

By Some one who cares.... on June 8th, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Two observations:

1) How do you prove a negative? (Sic is said to have provided his attorneys with “irrefutable evidence” over the weekend proving that he has never used heroin)

2) All the shity things you say here about all sorts of people (some times true some times false) and yet you go run and hide behind a law suit the first time some throws one your way. Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it you coward!

By Party Pam on June 8th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Remember Hilton Head, sweetie!

Pam

By Party Pam on June 8th, 2008 at 1:53 pm

Remember Hilton Head, my sweet!

Pam

By BloggingMyBrainsOut on June 8th, 2008 at 4:11 pm

Sic ‘em, Sic.

Good Lord, these people are stalking you for calling that mobile home princess out on this one.

I’d spam their a55e5 if it was my site!!! Unless you just like wading through their twisted thoughts.

By Andy Griffith on June 8th, 2008 at 4:51 pm

Good Lord, man, you’ve got so many different folks in that pea-brain of yours, that when you refer to yourself, you not only do it in the third person, …

But the THIRD PERSON PLURAL.

You are one highly odd dude.

Andy

By jeff on June 8th, 2008 at 5:01 pm

I think Andy is also the stalker…..

By Cal on June 8th, 2008 at 5:12 pm

The Ceips crowd has shown their true colors. Vague insinuations of criminal activity and unsubstantiated personal attacks, all while hiding behind the veil of anonymity.

Andy, B.I.N., Party–If you are so willing to belittle Mr. Folks, why not disclose your true identities? Why not stand publicly behind your disparaging statements?

Are you too ashamed? Or scared? Or cowardly?

By q. on June 8th, 2008 at 5:32 pm

FITS,

Forget heroin. The very fact that you’d consider filing suit based on these comments - unless I watched the wrong video clip - is enough to make anyone think you’re smokin’ crack. The only thing irrefutable in all of this is that the people running this website are a bunch of special-ed nincompoops. And besides, even if you did shoot a little smack here and there, who cares? It can’t be worse than anything Barack Obama did, and I’d say he’s almost as popular as you. Loosen up the tourniquets and re-f*cking-lax!

~Quintus

By FreeBird on June 8th, 2008 at 6:27 pm

Whoa. I think she is coming on to you Willie. Or it may be a he. I think the new thing in some of Rod Shealy’s customer base is lifting each other’s buns. They must have grown bored with the coke whores, and you-know-what in general.

Not sayin’…Just sayin’…

I’d watch out.

By Calhoun Fawls on June 8th, 2008 at 10:46 pm

It will be interesting to see if this suit comes to pass after the primary is over. Note that the Fits folks say Tuesday. My guess is when Ceips loses to Davis, this will be over.

If it is not, Sic, remember my own situation. I was called a diabetic who drank a case of beer a day by a county official. I was hot and ready to sue. Then someone told me I was a public figure and the truth was a defense.

Relax, Will, you guys have Ceips beat. Enjoy the win and move on.

By Dude on June 9th, 2008 at 8:51 am

You are publishing the allegedly slanderous material yourself, didn’t your lawyers tell you not to do that? That’s a primo defense against damages, which is hard to show anyway. Be careful, you’re about to file a frivolous lawsuit. But you know about that statute because you were still up Sanford’s ass when he took all the credit for it, right?

§ 15-36-10. Frivolous lawsuits; signing pleadings; imposition of sanctions; notice and opportunity to respond; reporting violations.

(A)(1) A pleading filed in a civil or administrative action on behalf of a party who is represented by an attorney must be signed by at least one attorney of record who is an active member of the South Carolina Bar or who is admitted to practice in the courts of this State and must include the address and telephone number of the attorney signing the document.

(2) A document filed in a civil or administrative action by a party who is not represented by an attorney must be signed by the party and must include the address and telephone number of the party.

(3) The signature of an attorney or a pro se litigant constitutes a certificate to the court that:

(a) the person has read the document;

(b) a reasonable attorney in the same circumstances would believe that under the facts his claim or defense may be warranted under the existing law or, if his claim or defense is not warranted under the existing law, a good faith argument exists for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law;

(c) a reasonable attorney in the same circumstances would believe that his procurement, initiation, continuation, or defense of a civil cause is not intended merely to harass or injure the other party; and

(d) a reasonable attorney in the same circumstances would believe his claim or defense is not frivolous, interposed for delay, or brought for any purpose other than securing proper discovery, joinder of parties, or adjudication of the claim or defense upon which the proceedings are based.

(4) An attorney or pro se litigant participating in a civil or administrative action or defense may be sanctioned for:

(a) filing a frivolous pleading, motion, or document if:

(i) the person has not read the frivolous pleading, motion, or document;

(ii) a reasonable attorney in the same circumstances would believe that under the facts, his claim or defense was clearly not warranted under existing law and that a good faith or reasonable argument did not exist for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law;

(iii) a reasonable attorney presented with the same circumstances would believe that the procurement, initiation, continuation, or defense of a civil cause was intended merely to harass or injure the other party; or

(iv) a reasonable attorney presented with the same circumstances would believe the pleading, motion, or document is frivolous, interposed for merely delay, or merely brought for any purpose other than securing proper discovery, joinder of parties, or adjudication of the claim or defense upon which the proceedings are based;

(b) making frivolous arguments a reasonable attorney would believe were not reasonably supported by the facts; or

(c) making frivolous arguments that a reasonable attorney would believe were not warranted under the existing law or if there is no good faith argument that exists for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.

(B)(1) If a document is not signed or does not otherwise comply with this section, it must be stricken unless it is signed promptly or amended to comply with this section after the omission is called to the attention of the attorney or the party.

(2) If a document is signed in violation of this section, or an attorney or pro se litigant has violated subsection (A)(4), the court, upon its own motion or motion of a party, may impose upon the person in violation any sanction which the court considers just, equitable, and proper under the circumstances.

(C)(1) At the conclusion of a trial and after a verdict for or a verdict against damages has been rendered or a case has been dismissed by a directed verdict, summary judgment, or judgment notwithstanding the verdict, upon motion of the prevailing party, the court shall proceed to determine if the claim or defense was frivolous. An attorney, party, or pro se litigant shall be sanctioned for a frivolous claim or defense if the court finds the attorney, party, or pro se litigant failed to comply with one of the following conditions:

(a) a reasonable attorney in the same circumstances would believe that under the facts, his claim or defense was clearly not warranted under existing law and that a good faith or reasonable argument did not exist for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law;

(b) a reasonable attorney in the same circumstances would believe that his procurement, initiation, continuation, or defense of the civil suit was intended merely to harass or injure the other party; or

(c) a reasonable attorney in the same circumstances would believe that the case or defense was frivolous as not reasonably founded in fact or was interposed merely for delay, or was merely brought for a purpose other than securing proper discovery, joinder of proposed parties, or adjudication of the claim or defense upon which the proceedings are based.

(2) Unless the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that an attorney, party, or pro se litigant engaged in advancing a frivolous claim or defense, the attorney, party, or pro se litigant shall not be sanctioned.

(D) A person is entitled to notice and an opportunity to respond before the imposition of sanctions pursuant to the provisions of this section. A court or party proposing a sanction pursuant to this section shall notify the court and all parties of the conduct constituting a violation of the provisions of this section and explain the basis for the potential sanction imposed. Upon notification, the attorney, party, or pro se litigant who allegedly violated subsection (A)(4) has thirty days to respond to the allegations as that person considers appropriate including, but not limited to, by filing a motion to withdraw the pleading, motion, document, or argument or by offering an explanation of mitigation.

(E) In determining if an attorney, party, or a pro se litigant has violated the provisions of this section, the court shall take into account:

(1) the number of parties;

(2) the complexity of the claims and defenses;

(3) the length of time available to the attorney, party, or pro se litigant to investigate and conduct discovery for alleged violations of the provisions of subsection (A)(4);

(4) information disclosed or undisclosed to the attorney, party, or pro se litigant through discovery and adequate investigation;

(5) previous violations of the provisions of this section;

(6) the response, if any, of the attorney, party, or pro se litigant to the allegation that he violated the provisions of this section; and

(7) other factors the court considers just, equitable, or appropriate under the circumstances.

(F) In determining whether sanctions are appropriate or the severity of a sanction, the court shall consider previous violations of the provisions of this section.

(G) Sanctions may include:

(1) an order for the party represented by an attorney or pro se litigant to pay the reasonable costs and attorney’s fees of the prevailing party under a motion pursuant to this section. Costs shall include, but not be limited to, the following: the time required of the prevailing party by the frivolous proceeding, and travel expenses, mileage, parking, costs of reports, and any additional reasonable consequential expenses of the prevailing party resulting from the frivolous proceeding;

(2) an order for the attorney to pay a reasonable fine to the court; or

(3) a directive of a nonmonetary nature, including injunctive relief, designed to deter a future frivolous action or an action in bad faith.

(H) If the court imposes a sanction on an attorney in violation of the provisions of this section, the court shall report its findings to the South Carolina Commission of Lawyer Conduct.

(I) This act shall not alter the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure or the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules.

(J) The provisions of this section shall not apply where an attorney or pro se litigant establishes a basis to proceed with litigation, or to assert or controvert an issue therein, that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of the existing law.

(K) The provisions of this section apply in addition to all other remedies available at law or in equity.

(L) The amount requested for damages in a pleading may not be considered in a determination of a violation of the provisions of this section.

(M) All violations of the provisions of this section must be reported to the South Carolina Supreme Court and a public record must be maintained and reported annually to the Governor, Senate, and House of Representatives.

HISTORY: 1988 Act No. 432, § 6.

By Believe It Not (a.k.a. Sic Willie's Stalker) on June 9th, 2008 at 10:50 am

Another willie scam.

We join others is demanding sic(k) willie disclose his “irrefutable evidence” that he never used heroin. Which reminds us that sic(k) willie never answered our question. We made it simple.

Dear Mr. Will Folks, have you every used any illegal drug or substance and/or have you ever improperly or illegally used any legal or illegal drug or substance?

The BIN Legal Department crafted this question so that exceeding the recommended dosage for Tylenol or Alka Seltzer to help with one of your daily hangovers would require a “yes” response.

We care not about Tylenol or Alkiee Seltzer, but we are interested in your answer. Yes or No. Then you can explain.

BIN News Editorial Sfaff