COLUMBIA, S.C. — Alex Murdaugh’s lawyers want a judge to reconsider his decision to freeze their client’s assets and appoint overseers, arguing the overseers’ powers are too broad and that the court jumped to conclusions without all the facts, according to court papers.
In a motion filed Monday, John Tiller and M. Dawes Cooke Jr., attorneys for the suspended Hampton lawyer, argued the court went too far in appointing receivers who control Murdaugh and his son’s assets with little oversight and no means for the Murdaughs to access their money for day-to-day expenses.
They also argued that attorneys did not present enough evidence that the Murdaughs were selling off their assets in bad faith.
S.C. Judge Dan Hall approved the receivers on Nov. 2 after a motion filed by Mark Tinsley.
Tinsley represents the estate of Mallory Beach in a wrongful death lawsuit. Beach, 19, was killed after being thrown from a boat in February 2019 alleged to have been driven by Paul Murdaugh. Tinsley filed the motion for Murdaugh’s assets to be frozen and receivers appointed because he feared Murdaugh’s funds would dry up by the time their case finished.
Reached on Monday afternoon, Tinsley said he could not respond to the filing from Murdaugh’s lawyer because he had not read it.
Eric Bland, an attorney representing Murdaugh’s deceased housekeeper’s estate in a lawsuit against Murdaugh, said Murdaugh “has lost the ability to control his checkbook with his own pen because of the stuff he has done.”
Specifically, he pointed to how Murdaugh signed a “confession of judgment” on Oct. 29, after his brother sued him over $90,000 in unpaid debts, on the same day Judge Hall heard arguments about whether receivers should be appointed.
That confession moved his brother Randy to the front of the line of debtors whenever receivers divide Murdaugh’s money, according to Bland. In a separate case, Murdaugh’s former law partner sued him for $477,000 in unpaid debts. Murdaugh signed a confession in that case as well.
The receivers — Peter McCoy, a former lawmaker and U.S. attorney, and attorney John Lay — filed motions asking the judge to suspend the execution of judgments to Randy Murdaugh and Murdaugh’s former law partner, John E. Parker.
Murdaugh is in jail on charges of stealing more than $3 million intended as death settlement money for the estate of his deceased housekeeper, Gloria Satterfield.
Murdaugh’s lawyers argue that Tinsley had not provided enough evidence that transactions by Murdaugh and his son were anything out of the ordinary.
In advocating for receivers to be appointed, Tinsley pointed to recent transactions after Murduagh appointed his son, Buster, power of attorney. Those include satisfying a mortgage on a property valued at $970,000 and selling off $250,000 in ownership of a hunting club.
There is “no evidence whether these sales were for fair market value or in the ordinary course of business for the Murdaugh Defendants, and the Court gave improper weight to those documents, which were unsubstantiated and unexplained by affidavit or testimony,” Murdaugh’s lawyers argue.
Tiller, reached by phone Monday, said he wanted to see “actual transactions” and legal documents.
Bland said “when you’re sued, a picture is snapped,” and transactions and transfers made after that moment should be held in suspicion.
Additionally, Murdaugh’s lawyers said the receiverships don’t provide enough guidance on how the Murdaughs can access money for their day-to-day lives.
Under the current order, “Alex Murdaugh cannot make bail or pay for attorneys despite his constitutional right to defend himself in both the civil and criminal actions. ... Alex Murdaugh cannot pay for medical treatment that he currently needs or pay for ongoing necessary and routine expenses. ... Buster Murdaugh has no place to live and no money for daily living expenses, such as groceries or basic utilities,” according to Murdaugh’s lawyers.
Bland said this is a valid question, but that Murdaugh’s lawyers should work with the receivers to draft a budget rather than fight the receivership in court. The receivers, he said, are supposed to be impartial.
“The receiver wasn’t appointed to be just one-sided. I can’t pick up the phone and tell him to do something,” Bland said. “He’s independent.”
Judge Hall now can hold a hearing on whether to reconsider the receivership.
-----
