Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Litigation Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council rejects plaintiffs' settlement offer in James Ware case, directs county attorney to counter
Summary
After an executive session under South Carolina law, the Beaufort County caucus voted unanimously to not approve the plaintiffs' proposed settlement in James Ware v. Beaufort County (Buckingham Landing) and instructed the county attorney to prepare a counteroffer consistent with terms discussed in executive session.
Get email alerts on the Litigation Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A Beaufort County caucus meeting on Jan. 12, 2026, ended with the council voting to reject a proposed settlement offer in the James Ware v. Beaufort County (Buckingham Landing) case and directing the county attorney to prepare a counteroffer.
Committee member (S3) moved that “counsel not approve the settlement offer proposed by the plaintiffs in the litigation related to James Ware v. Beaufort County at this time, and that the County Attorney counteroffer for terms as discussed in Executive Session.” Committee member (S2) seconded the motion. Chair (S1) called for a show-of-hands vote, which the record reports as unanimous.
The council discussed the matter in executive session under South Carolina Code §30-4-70(a)(2), which allows closed-session legal advice and negotiation strategy in pending litigation. The caucus did not disclose the negotiation terms discussed in executive session; the motion only authorizes the county attorney to return a counteroffer consistent with those closed-session directions.
The rejection of the plaintiffs' proposal does not itself settle the case; it directs the county attorney to negotiate new terms. Chair (S1) said the caucus would reconvene after the regular council meeting, and no additional actions on the litigation were recorded in the caucus before adjournment.
Authorities cited in the meeting included South Carolina Code §30-4-70(a)(2). Vote counts were recorded as a unanimous show of hands; exact numerical tallies were not specified in the transcript.
