SC Courts Appear to Be Growing Frustrated with Jeff Davis’s Lawfare
The South Carolina Court of Appeals has declined to dismiss or vacate a contempt order against Greenville County Republican Party Chairman Jeff Davis. This decision upholds a ruling that requires him to serve 90 days in jail or pay nearly $40,000 in attorney’s fees. It also marks the latest chapter in a years-long legal battle stemming from Davis’s defamation lawsuits against political consultant Chad Connelly and others.
Davis is known for using frivolous lawfare against his political opponents and for abusing the use of unnamed John Does across various counties in South Carolina. With one of those in 2020, he filed multiple libel lawsuits in Newberry County against Connelly and other figures connected to South Carolina’s Exceptional SC scholarship program. The suits claimed defamation and misconduct but were dismissed by the circuit court.
“Plaintiff (Jefferson Davis, Jr.) has repeatedly and willfully disobeyed the substantive and procedural requirements of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure and Orders of this Court and South Carolina Courts of Appeals.”
Following this dismissal, Circuit Judge Donald B. Hocker ordered Davis in November 2024 to pay, within ten days, either $39,443 in contempt fees to the defendants or to serve 90 days in jail for civil contempt. The order was issued because Davis failed to comply with prior court orders and continued to file motions deemed frivolous by the court.
According to Judge Hocker, he said, “Plaintiff (Jefferson Davis, Jr.) has repeatedly and willfully disobeyed the substantive and procedural requirements of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure and Orders of this Court and South Carolina Courts of Appeals.”
He continued to state that Davis’s recent health and financial claims were not an excuse for noncompliance that has gone on for years. He said further that “(Davis) has failed to establish any cognizable defense to or convincing evidence in support of his claims of inability to comply with these orders.” It is important to note that Davis had consistently ignored direct court orders before his diagnosis or illness.
Davis appealed the contempt order last year in December 2024. He argued that financial hardship and health issues, including a colon cancer diagnosis, should excuse non-compliance. In his October 2024 declaration, Davis wrote, “I continue to deal with these severe health/cancer issues… Given the substantial financial costs incurred because of the above health/cancer issues, I am currently not able to pay the court-ordered legal fees.”
How much of his medical expenses are covered by insurance, and how much he has paid directly, are unknown. As far as we know, Davis has not had any known employment for over a decade, so his illness should not affect his income.
Despite his arguments, the South Carolina Court of Appeals denied Davis’s motion to dismiss the case altogether and refused to vacate the contempt order late last month, November 2025. The appeal remains active, but the underlying order stands as is. In other words, the contempt order remains in effect during the appeal and will not be vacated as was requested by Davis and denied by the appellate court.
By this recent denial, it appears that the court is acknowledging that Judge Hocker's contempt order has legal standing, or at least requires review rather than being vacated as requested by Davis.
Professor-level commentary on similar cases highlights that appellate courts typically defer to trial courts on contempt findings unless there is a clear legal or procedural error. This means Davis’s appeal will likely focus on whether the circuit court correctly applied the law and not on his personal circumstances.
By this recent denial, it appears that the court is acknowledging that Judge Hocker's contempt order has legal standing, or at least requires review rather than being vacated as requested by Davis.
Those familiar with this case expect the appellate court to issue a final decision in 2026. If the contempt order is upheld, Davis could face incarceration unless he satisfies the judgment. The case serves as a cautionary tale about the risks of prolonged litigation, abuse of lawfare, and the limits of hardship defenses in civil contempt proceedings.
Time will soon tell, and maybe Davis and those like him will take into consideration a timeless thought that those who weaponize the law for personal vendettas forget that justice is a double-edged sword: it cuts deepest against those who wield it recklessly.
---------------------------
Read this article for more detail on all Jeff Davis's frivilous lawsuits: https://www.timesexaminer.com/political/13220-sc-upstate-political-leaders-repeated-use-of-lawfare-backfires
