On December 20, 2018 the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (the "2018 Farm Bill") became law. Following closely on the heels of the 2018 Farm Bill, on March 28, 2019 the South Carolina Hemp Farming Act ("S.C. Hemp Farming Act") was signed into law. The following is a brief overview of the status of hemp (also called "commercial hemp" or "industrial hemp") farming and regulation in South Carolina in the wake of the 2018 Farm Bill and the S.C. Hemp Farming Act. Background The terms "hemp" (which has non-drug connotations and uses) and "marijuana" (no further explanation necessary) describe the same plant genus: cannabis. The difference between the two is generally based on the relative amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contained in the plant. Hemp plants are cultivated to produce fiber and seeds and very little if any THC. Marijuana plants, on the other hand, are cultivated to produce more THC. THC...
It was only a matter of time before arbitrability (the enforceability of an agreement to arbitrate) put a South Carolina courts in the position to construe the language in a power of attorney ("POA"). And this opinion did. I try to view these decisions through the lens of how an attorney practicing in South Carolina might learn from them. And this decision, like some others involving the FAA and arbitrability, (for example, Grant v. Kuhn Chevrolet or Herron v. Century BMW , had the litigator and the drafter in me scratching my head. Or at least I was confused until I learned about what had happened legislatively in the time since the POAs at issue in Arredondo were scrutinized by three (3) South Carolina courts. This decision, involving a POA executed before January 1, 2017, is likely an anomaly or a one-off, as going forward the S.C. Uniform Power of Attorney Act (SCUPOA) provides a guide for the creation of POAs that may avoid the necessity for so much j...
As With Information Security, So Too With Calendaring . . . "This is a cautionary tale for every attorney who litigates in an era of e-filing." The first sentence of the 5th Circuit's opinion in Rollins v. Home Depot is quite the attention-grabber. But this tale is nothing new. Attorneys must understand the potential pitfalls of electronic service and take reasonable steps to avoid them. As I have been saying (writing) for over ten years now, you cannot blame computers or computer software for missed deadlines. Instead, use knowledgeable people and sound processes to manage this risk. Blaming the Machines is not a Good Play Rollins (Briefly) . All attorneys using the case management/electronic case files (CM/ECF) system in federal courts agree to accept service of filings (and other documents and notices) via email. FCRCP 5(b)(2)(E) . Counsel for Home Depot moved for summary judgment. Rollins' counsel didn't see the electronic notification of the motion becaus...