facebook linked in twitter youtube instagram

Nelson Mullins COVID-19 Resources

Nelson Mullins is continuing to monitor developments related to COVID-19, including guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and various federal, state, and local government authorities. The firm is taking appropriate precautionary actions and has implemented plans to ensure the continuation of all firm services to clients from both in office and remote work arrangements across our 25 offices. 

In addition, click the link below to access extensive resources to address a wide variety of topics resulting from the virus, in general and by industry,  including topics such as essential businesses, force majeure, business interruption insurance, CARES Act and FFCRA, and others. 

Nelson Mullins COVID-19 Resources

The LatestView All

May 20, 2020

Bar Foundation, Supreme Court Historical Society Feature Claude Scarborough in Podcast Series
close

In the News

February 3, 2020

Team Obtains Parole for 17th Inmate Erroneously Denied Release

Index-Journal

Partner Travis Dayhuff and Senior Paralegal Tammie Pope recently obtained parole for a Laurens man who had been denied parole since 2001 based on erroneous interpretations of the number of votes necessary for parole by the S.C. Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services (DPPPS).

In 2015, Dayhuff and Pope began assisting inmate David Rose in his effort to obtain parole. Rose sought out the Nelson Mullins team after learning about Barton v. the S.C. Board of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services, in which Dayhuff and Pope had earned a S.C. Supreme Court ruling that DPPPS had been requiring inmates to receive more votes at hearings than necessary to obtain parole in violation of ex post facto and the parole statute.

Rose, like Barton, had received the requisite number of votes for parole at a hearing in 2001. But DPPPS took the position that Rose did not have enough evidence of the vote count to receive parole under the Barton case. DPPPS’s position was particularly unfair and frustrating as DPPPS had failed to make and keep appropriate records of parole hearings, Dayhuff said.

Before he became the Firm’s client, Rose litigated pro se against DPPPS for more than 10 years. Dayhuff and Pope took Rose’s case to the Administrative Law Court, where they were successful, but the Court of Appeals reversed. Dayhuff then appealed to the Supreme Court and argued the case in October. The Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion Jan. 29 reversing the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court remanded Rose’s case back to DPPPS so that Rose could receive the parole he should have received 19 years ago, after his 2001 parole hearing.

Rose is the 17th client who has gained freedom through parole with help from attorneys in Nelson Mullins’ Parole Project since 2003.

View Article



What's New
Idea Exchange
Top