Rule 1.Scope of rules
Group I: Scope of Rules — One Form of Action · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 13, 2026
Full Text of Rule 1
Plain-English Summary
Rule 1 is the on-ramp for the whole rulebook. It tells courts and lawyers that these rules cover civil suits across South Carolina, whether the underlying claim would once have been called a case at law or a suit in equity. That old divide no longer determines which procedure applies. One set of rules now runs the show, subject only to the carve-outs listed in Rule 81 for courts and proceedings that operate under their own procedural framework.
The second sentence carries the weight for everyday practice. When a judge has to choose between two readings of a rule, or decide how much latitude to give a party on a procedural misstep, Rule 1 supplies the tiebreaker: pick the path that moves the case toward a just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution. Courts lean on that language when deciding motions that turn on fairness or efficiency rather than a specific rule's exact wording.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Rule 1 mean these rules cover every civil case in South Carolina?
Nearly every one. Rule 1 applies broadly to civil suits in state court, but Rule 81 lists specific proceedings and courts where different procedures control, so the two rules have to be read together.
What does "just, speedy, and inexpensive" require a court to do?
It sets a goal rather than a fixed test. Judges cite it when weighing whether to excuse a procedural lapse, streamline a dispute, or reject a maneuver that would drag out litigation without adding value to the merits.
Do these rules apply to criminal cases?
No. Rule 1 is limited to civil suits. Criminal procedure in South Carolina runs under a separate set of rules.
Why does Rule 1 mention cases "at law or in equity"?
South Carolina once handled legal and equitable claims under different procedures. Rule 1 signals that this distinction no longer dictates which procedural rules a case follows.
What happens if a specific rule and the goals in Rule 1 seem to conflict?
The specific rule governs the mechanics of the situation it addresses. Rule 1 mostly guides interpretation at the margins, not a license to override a rule's plain terms.