R. Hawthorne Barrett
A native of South Carolina, Thorne Barrett has practiced with Turner Padget since graduating from law school in 1999. Thorne developed his litigation skills early in his career by defending individuals and corporations in civil lawsuits of various kinds. During that time, he served as first and second chair in numerous trials, hearings, and other proceedings in both the state and federal courts. He also performed legal work for several South Carolina municipalities. Eventually, Thorne began to focus on complex motions and appellate work, while maintaining a busy litigation practice.
Today, Thorne still handles litigation in the state and federal courts, but he devotes a substantial amount of his practice to appellate work. He has argued more than 20 cases in South Carolina’s appellate courts (the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals). Thorne’s appellate work has covered almost every area of civil litigation, including professional negligence, product liability, insurance issues, business disputes and questions of constitutional law. Many of his appeals have led to published decisions in his clients’ favor.
Thorne’s appellate practice has allowed him to analyze and handle legal issues in several different areas. It has also given him considerable experience with the complex procedural rules and requirements of the appellate courts. Thorne has been able to use this experience to guide his clients past potential pitfalls and streamline their appeals as much as possible. This has often resulted in more efficient and less costly treks through the appellate system.
“Civility and effective advocacy are not mutually exclusive. I believe an attorney can be – and should be – courteous and responsive, while still vigorously pursuing the client’s best interests.”
Representative Matters
Appellate
- Represented a chiropractor who had obtained a defense verdict in a malpractice case, only to have that verdict reversed by the South Carolina Court of Appeals. Thorne sought and obtained discretionary review by the South Carolina Supreme Court and successfully argued for the reversal of the Court of Appeals’ decision and reinstatement of the defense verdict.
- Represented an attorney who had been granted a summary judgment in a malpractice case. Thorne successfully argued that the attorney could not reasonably have anticipated how a court in another state would decide a close question of law, which was a necessary element of the plaintiff’s case. As a result, the South Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment for the attorney.
- Defended a retail store in a case brought by a customer who was attacked by two store employees. Thorne successfully argued that the employees acted for their own personal reasons, not for any legitimate business purpose of the store, and therefore, the store could not be liable for their actions. The South Carolina Supreme Court agreed, and affirmed a directed verdict in the store’s favor.
- Represented a landowner whose cattle escaped from a holding area and wandered onto a road, causing an accident with a passing motorist. In a case of first impression, Thorne argued a strict liability statute for livestock owners did not apply to damages caused by animals on a public highway, but only to damages caused by animals “trespassing” on private property. The Court of Appeals agreed and affirmed summary judgment for the landowner, finding there was no evidence the animals got onto the road due to any negligence on his part.
- Represented homeowners who were sued when an “odd jobs” worker fell from a ladder on their property and was injured. Thorne argued the homeowners did not have a duty to train or supervise the worker because he was not their “employee” in the legal sense of that word. The Court of Appeals concurred and affirmed summary judgment for the homeowners.
- In a wreck case handled by the Firm, the jury returned a verdict that was far lower than the damages claimed by the plaintiff. The trial judge added more than $10,000 to the verdict, and Thorne handled the defendant’s appeal. Thorne argued the judge had not presented the requisite “compelling reasons” to disturb the original verdict because the plaintiff’s damages were disputed at trial. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial judge’s decision and reinstated the original verdict.
Product Liability
- Represented a leading manufacturer of industrial HVAC systems in a wrongful death case. Thorne developed a strong defense on the issue of liability and helped the client achieve a favorable settlement.
Premises Liability
- Defended a vocational school and a national retail chain in separate, but similar, trip-and-fall incidents. Thorne successfully challenged the plaintiffs’ claims and obtained favorable results for both clients prior to trial.