Tim Landholt v. Kendall Corley, et al.

Date: 08-29-2025

Case Number: 22-CV-2599

Judge: Sherri A. Lydon

Court: United States District Court for the District of South Carolina (Richland County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Defendant's Attorney:

Description: Columbia, South Carolina personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a civil rights violation theory.

A South Carolina state court judge issued a bench warrant to arrest Tim Landholt for not paying child support. Sheriff’s deputies soon arrested Landholt, who was fined and sent on his way. But the clerk’s office never recalled or cancelled the executed warrant. Over five years later, deputies again arrested Landholt on the stale warrant. He spent three
days in jail.

andholt sued Jeanette McBride, in her official capacity as the Richland County Clerk of Court, for negligence under South Carolina law. McBride claimed state-law immunity and the district court granted summary judgment to her on that basis.
Landholt now challenges the district court’s holding that the South Carolina Tort Claims Act immunized McBride from Landholt’s suit. On the record facts, and at this stage in the case, we think the district court erred. We therefore vacate the judgment in part and remand for further proceedings.

Landholt fell behind on his child support payments. A family court judge ordered Landholt to appear in court and explain why he shouldn’t be held in contempt. When the day of the hearing arrived, Landholt didn’t show up. So the court issued a warrant for his arrest. The clerk’s office filed the warrant and sent a copy to the Richland County Sheriff.

Several weeks later, Landholt appeared in court to make a payment and was arrested. The court held a hearing that day, found him in contempt, and ordered him to pay a $200 fine.

That should have been the end of the matter. But the warrant was never recalled. So over five years later, law enforcement again arrested Landholt on the stale warrant.

Outcome: The District Court granted the Defendant's motion for summary judgment.

Reversed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: