AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTIONS 8-21-1010 AND 8-21-1060, BOTH RELATING TO FEES AND COSTS TO BE COLLECTED BY MAGISTRATES, BOTH SO AS TO INCREASE VARIOUS FEES AND COSTS; BY AMENDING SECTION 22-3-340, RELATING TO ASSESSMENTS ON FILINGS IN MAGISTRATES COURT, SO AS TO INCREASE THE ASSESSMENT ON SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT FILINGS AND ALL OTHER CIVIL FILINGS; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 22-2-5, RELATING TO ELIGIBILITY EXAMINATIONS FOR MAGISTRATES, SO AS TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TIME ELIGIBILITY EXAMINATIONS ARE VALID.
H4813 revises South Carolina’s magistrates court fee schedule by increasing a range of filing, service, and process fees collected by magistrates and deposited in county general funds. The bill raises charges for civil recognizance, bonds in claim-and-delivery and attachment cases, summonses and judgments in civil actions, executions, landlord-tenant proceedings, and miscellaneous filings. It also increases the statewide judicial assessment on magistrates court filings, raising the assessment on summons and complaint filings and on other civil filings, while expressly exempting restraining orders from the new assessment structure.
The bill also makes a related change to the magistrate appointment eligibility process by extending the validity period of magistrate eligibility examination results from six months before and after appointment to eighteen months before and after appointment. The act is set to take effect on January 1, 2027, and the bill specifies that fee increases taking effect on that date must supplement, not replace, existing county funding used for magistrates court facilities, personnel, and security.
H4813 amends Sections 8-21-1010 and 8-21-1060 of the South Carolina Code to increase numerous magistrates court fees and costs, and amends Section 22-3-340 to increase filing assessments in magistrates court. These changes will raise the cost of initiating and processing many civil matters in magistrates court, including landlord-tenant cases, summonses, executions, and other filings, and will increase revenue flowing to county and state judicial funding streams. The bill also amends Section 22-2-5(A) to lengthen the period during which magistrate eligibility exam results remain valid for appointment purposes.
The bill appears to have broad legislative support overall, with strong passage in the House, approval on second reading in the Senate, and unanimous House concurrence in Senate amendments. The vote history suggests the measure was generally viewed as a routine court-fee update and funding mechanism rather than a controversial policy change. The absence of committee transcript material limits insight into detailed debate, but the recorded votes indicate substantial consensus.
The main point of potential contention is the increase in costs imposed on litigants and parties using magistrates court, especially in civil cases and landlord-tenant matters where fees are raised significantly. Any opposition would likely focus on access-to-justice concerns, the burden on low-income parties, tenants, and small claimants, and whether higher fees are appropriate for routine court access. The bill addresses some of that concern by requiring the new revenue to supplement existing court funding rather than replace it, indicating an intent to ensure the money improves court operations rather than offsetting current appropriations.