The South Carolina Supreme Court issued a mixed ruling Tuesday in a class action lawsuit brought by Mark Gregory Thompson and Jane Page Thompson against multiple Aiken County and City officials, affirming some aspects of the lower court's decision while reversing others and sending the case back for further proceedings.
The case, *Thompson v. Killian*, involves claims against Clay Killian in his official capacity as Aiken County Administrator, Jason Goings in his official capacity as Treasurer of Aiken County, Aiken County Council, Aiken County, the City of Aiken, Aiken City Council, and Stuart Bedenbaugh in his official capacity as City Manager of Aiken. The Thompsons filed the lawsuit on behalf of themselves and "all those similarly situated," indicating the potential for broader impact beyond the named plaintiffs.
Justice Verdin authored the opinion in the case, which was heard by the Supreme Court on Feb. 12, 2025, and filed on Nov. 5, 2025. The court's disposition of "affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded" suggests a complex legal dispute where different aspects of the circuit court's ruling received varying treatment from the state's highest court.
The case originated in Aiken County Circuit Court under Judge William P. Keesley before being appealed to the Supreme Court. The appellate case number 2023-000442 indicates the matter has been working its way through the court system for nearly two years.
Representing the Thompsons are attorneys William Camden Lewis, Brady Ryan Thomas, and Grace Madeline Babcock, all from Richardson Thomas, LLC of Columbia, along with Terry E. Richardson Jr., also of Richardson Thomas, LLC, based in Barnwell. The respondents are represented by multiple law firms, with Andrew F. Lindemann of Lindemann Law Firm, P.A. of Columbia representing the City of Aiken, Aiken City Council, and City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh. Bradley Truman Farrar of Aiken represents Aiken County, Aiken County Council, Treasurer Jason Goings, and County Administrator Clay Killian.
The case has drawn significant attention from other South Carolina counties, with multiple amicus curiae briefs filed. Beaufort County filed through James Keith Gilliam of Burr & Forman LLP of Greenville. Florence County was represented by D. Malloy McEachin Jr. of D. McEachin Law Firm, P.A. of Florence and Steve A. Matthews of Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, P.A. of Columbia. Greenville County and Spartanburg County jointly filed through Sarah P. Spruill of Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, P.A. of Greenville. Horry County participated through John Carroll Moylan III and Mary Lucille Dinkins, both of Wyche P.A. of Columbia.
The extensive involvement of multiple counties as amici curiae suggests the legal issues in the case have statewide implications that could affect municipal and county operations across South Carolina. When counties file amicus briefs, it typically indicates the outcome could establish precedent affecting how local governments operate or face potential liability.
The fact that all defendants are sued in their official capacities rather than individually points to claims involving governmental actions or policies rather than personal misconduct. Official capacity suits typically seek to change governmental practices or obtain monetary damages from government entities rather than individual officials.
The class action nature of the lawsuit means the Thompsons are seeking to represent not just their own interests but those of others who may have been similarly affected by the actions or policies of the defendants. Class actions are typically employed when numerous individuals have been harmed in a similar manner, making individual lawsuits impractical.
With the case now remanded to the circuit court, Judge Keesley will need to conduct further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion. The mixed nature of the ruling means some aspects of the plaintiffs' claims succeeded while others did not, requiring careful implementation of the high court's directives.
The involvement of both county and city officials suggests the dispute may involve overlapping jurisdictions or coordinated governmental actions affecting residents in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of Aiken County.
Given the Supreme Court's split decision, both sides can claim partial victories, but the remand indicates significant work remains to be done at the trial court level. The case will likely continue to be closely watched by other South Carolina municipalities given the amicus participation and potential precedential impact.
The timeline from the original filing through the Supreme Court's decision demonstrates the lengthy process involved in complex governmental litigation, with the case spanning multiple years as it moved through the court system.