South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

SCDOR vs. Patricia A. Crosby

South Carolina Department of Revenue

South Carolina Department of Revenue

Patricia A. Crosby




This matter was initiated by a citation issued by the South Carolina Department of Revenue ("Department") against Respondent for violations of the Video Game Machines Act [S.C. Code Ann. Section 12-21-2804(A), 12-21-2802, and 12-21-2748 (Supp. 1997)]. On July 24, 1997, Respondent was cited for having more than five licenses acquired pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. Section 12-21-2720 (A)(3) (Supp. 1997) (referred to as "Class III" machines and licenses) at a single place or premises, in violation of Section 12-21-2804(A) and 27 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 117-190 (Supp. 1997). A Department Determination was issued sustaining the imposition of the violation. The determination sought revocation of Respondent's's fifteen Class III machines licenses, that no licenses will be allowed for us \e in the location for a period of six months from the date of revocation and $5,0000.00 monetary penalty. The determination also imposed penalties for violation of Section 12-21-2748, failure to have owner operation identification on four stations of a multi station machine. Additionally, the determination imposed penalties for violation of Section 12-212-2802, failure to have penalty signs on four stations of a multi station machine.

Prior to the hearing, the parties worked out an agreement resolving the matter. That agreement is incorporated into this Order.

The agreement between the parties is as follows:

1. Respondent admits that on July 24, 1997, there were no employees on the premises of "Boardwalk in the Ville I," "Boardwalk in the Ville 6," and "Boardwalk in the Ville 5," located at I-95 & 17S, Hardeeville, South Carolina. Each of these three areas contained five Class III video poker machines and licenses. Respondents agree to the revocation of these fifteen licenses. Respondent further agrees to surrender these Class III licenses with nos. 3800776, 3800777, 3800749, 3800750, 3800778, 3800805, 3800806, 3800807, 3800808, 3800809, 3800761, 3800762, 3800763, 3800764, and 3800765, no later than 5:00 p.m. on May 28, 1998.

2. Respondent further agrees not to operate or allow the operation of any Class III machines at the physical location of the rooms as set forth in "1" above (as depicted on the attached diagram as the shaded areas), for a period of six months from May 28, 1998.

3. In consideration of the above, the Department agrees to waive the remaining monetary penalties sought for the single place or premises violation as to the Respondent. The Department further agrees to waive all penalties sought for the violations of Section 12-21-2802 and Section 12-21-2748. These penalties were imposed on multi station machines that did have at least one owner identification and penalty sign attached at the time of the inspection.

4. All parties understand and agree that the terms as set forth above constitute the full and final resolution of this matter.

I find the above settlement to be fair and equitable, approve such settlement, and hereby Order its adoption. This Court retains continuing jurisdiction to enforce this Order. As the parties no longer require a hearing on this matter, I also Order this matter Dismissed with Prejudice.



Administrative Law Judge

May 21, 1998

Columbia, South Carolina



Carol I. McMahan, Counsel for

Regulatory Litigation

Attorney for Petitioner


Darrell Thomas Johnson, Jr.

Attorney for Respondent

NOTE: Consent Order prepared by Petitioner's attorney, Carol I. McMahan. See file for attachment of diagram as referred to above in Paragraph No. 2.

Brown Bldg.






Copyright © 2022 South Carolina Administrative Law Court