If at any time after a trial or hearing has been commenced, but before the final order or judgment has been issued, the judge is unable to proceed, a successor judge shall be assigned. The successor judge may proceed upon certifying familiarity with the record and determining that the proceedings may be completed without prejudice to the parties. In a hearing or a trial without a jury, the successor judge shall, at the request of a party, recall any witness whose testimony is material and disputed and who is available to testify without undue burden. A successor judge may also provide for the recall of any witnesses.
Rule 63.Disability of a judge
Group VII: Judgment · Last amended April 28, 2004 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceRule 63 lets a successor judge finish a case when the judge who started the trial or hearing becomes unable to continue before a final order or judgment is entered, once the successor certifies familiarity with the record and finds the case can proceed without prejudice to the parties.
Full Text of Rule 63
Notes
Note to 2004 Amendment: The 2004 Amendment rewrote this Rule to provide a clear procedure when a judge who has heard some or all of a case is unable to proceed. The language is similar to Rule 63 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Amendment History
Amended by Order dated April 28, 2004.
Plain-English Summary
Judges become unavailable mid-case for all sorts of reasons — illness, retirement, reassignment. Rule 63 answers a narrow but practical question: what happens to a trial or hearing that has already started when that occurs? If a final order or judgment has not yet been issued, a successor judge is assigned to take over.
The successor does not step in without checking the file first. The rule requires that judge to certify familiarity with the record and to determine that the remaining proceedings can be completed without prejudice to the parties. Both findings have to be made before the case can continue in front of someone new.
In a hearing or trial without a jury, a party can require the successor judge to recall any witness whose testimony is both material and disputed, provided that witness is available to testify again without undue burden. The successor judge also has independent discretion to recall other witnesses even absent such a request. South Carolina rewrote Rule 63 in 2004 to lay out this procedure clearly, adopting language similar to the federal counterpart.
Frequently Asked Questions
What triggers the need for a successor judge under Rule 63?
The rule applies once a trial or hearing has commenced but before the judge who heard it has issued a final order or judgment, and that judge becomes unable to proceed.
Can the successor judge just pick up where the first judge left off?
Only after certifying familiarity with the record and finding that the remaining proceedings can be completed without prejudice to the parties. Those findings are required before the successor judge proceeds.
Can a party demand that a witness testify again for the new judge?
Yes, in a nonjury matter, if the witness's testimony is material and disputed and the witness remains available without undue burden. The successor judge can also recall other witnesses on the judge's own initiative.
When did South Carolina adopt the current version of Rule 63?
The current text comes from a 2004 amendment, which rewrote the rule to set out a clear procedure modeled on Rule 63 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Source & verification. Rule text, official Notes, and amendment
history are reproduced verbatim from the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure,
adopted by the Supreme Court of South Carolina. Last verified July 13, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: successor judge South Carolinajudge unable to proceedsubstitute judge mid-trialjudge disability during trial