As former South Carolina attorney Richard “Alex” Murdaugh remains jailed in the Richland County Detention Center without bond facing multiple criminal charges and civil suits, his attorneys are fighting to unfreeze his assets and to have his bond denial reconsidered.
On Friday, Nov. 12, attorneys John H. Tiller and M. Dawes Cooke Jr., of Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, PA, filed a motion in Hampton County Court of Common Pleas to alter or amend a recent order granting temporary injunction and appointing co-receivers and co-receivers counsel to preserve and manage Murdaugh’s assets.
The motion contends that not only is the current order unlawful, it also fails to provide for Murdaugh to pay legal and medical expense or provide for daily living expenses.
Previously reported:Plaintiffs seek to freeze Alex and Buster Murdaugh’s assets, monitor spending
Murders, mystery, money:Here’s a timeline of the Murdaugh family killings
The original injunction order, filed by attorney Mark Tinsley in October in regards to a 2019 wrongful death suit (Renee S. Beach, plaintiff, et al VS Gregory M. Parker, Inc., defendant, et al), was approved by Circuit Judge Daniel D. Hall on Nov. 1, effectively freezing Murdaugh’s assets in the face of multiple civil suits and appointing legal custodians of his money and property.
Tinsley is an attorney representing Beach, who is suing Murdaugh and other parties following the death of her teenage daughter, Mallory Beach, in an alleged boating while intoxicated crash involving Murdaugh’s late son, Paul Murdaugh. Other suits have been filed against Murdaugh in regard to this boat crash, and two suits are pending involving allegations of stolen money, and multiple plaintiffs now have an interest in Murdaugh’s assets.
The motion to appeal that decision, filed on behalf of Murdaugh and his surviving son, Richard Alexander “Buster” Murdaugh, Jr., contends that Tinsley’s motion made no findings of fact to support the relief granted, runs counter to well-settled South Carolina law precedents and violates Murdaugh’s due process.
Murdaugh’s attorneys are requesting a new hearing on this motion.
Murdaugh’s motion to appeal claims the following:
- The plaintiff made no showing that she has an inadequate remedy at law, and accordingly, the court failed to make any such finding;
- The plaintiff failed to make any showing that she is likely to be successful on her claims against the Murdaugh defendants, a necessary element for imposing a temporary injunction, and accordingly, the order failed to make any finding in this regard;
- The possibility of inadequate assets to ultimately pay a judgment that has not been rendered is not “irreparable harm”;
- The court erred by not requiring plaintiff to post a bond, despite the risk of significant damage to the Murdaugh defendants;
- The order erroneously appointed a receiver even though the lawsuit does not involve a dispute over the subject assets;
- The order failed to identify any law or “existing practice” supporting the appointment of a receiver in this case;
- The order erroneously grants the co-receivers the authority to sell the subject assets, which amounts to the unconstitutional taking of the Murdaugh defendants’ property;
- The order improperly allows the co-receivers to exercise control and change locks on property that is co-owned by individuals who are not party to this action and deprives those parties of their interest in their property;
- The court erred in failing to provide for some of the subject assets to be made available for the support and maintenance of the Murdaugh defendants. The order fails to provide for the Murdaughs to continue to maintain themselves through the course of this litigation, despite there being no adverse findings against them in this or any other civil or criminal action. Under the current order, Murdaugh cannot make bail or pay for attorneys despite his constitutional right to defend himself in both civil and criminal actions. Furthermore, Murdaugh cannot pay for medical treatment that he currently needs or pay for ongoing necessary and routine expenses, including food, groceries,or COBRA insurance. Similarly, under the current order, Buster Murdaugh has no place to live and no money for daily living expenses, such as groceries or basic utilities.
It is not clear if and when a judge will reconsider that motion.
In an earlier action, attorney Dick Harpootlian last week filed a petition with the S.C. Supreme Court asking the high court to reconsider Murdaugh’s recent bond denial, The State newspaper in Columbia reported.
It is not clear if or when the court will consider that petition, either.