COLUMBIA, S.C. - The South Carolina Senate wrapped up nearly three weeks of debate on legislation that limits certain types of lawsuits, reaching a compromise Tuesday on who should pay lawsuit settlements in cases involving multiple defendants.

That was the biggest issue remaining in the legislation. A House version of the bill eliminated the practice that forces wealthy defendants to pay more than their share of a jury award.

The plan the Senate approved says defendants who are less than 50 percent responsible would not have to worry about picking up all the damages. All defendants would pay their own share of the damages in cases where nobody shares more than 50 percent of responsibility, said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Glenn McConnell.

The existing practice is "just fundamentally unfair," said McConnell, R-Charleston.

The legislation is a major step toward achieving a balance between protecting citizens rights and the need to be competitive economically, McConnell said. "We didn't throw the public's rights out with it," he said.

The legislation touches on other areas, too.

_ People will have to bring lawsuits in the counties where an injury occurred or where the defendant lives or does business. McConnell says that will end the practice of shopping for a place most likely to yield a sympathetic jury or large settlement.

_ Homeowners and others would have to discover shoddy construction within eight years of buying a new home or building or the could not sue. The current law is 13 years.

_ Lawyers would face sanctions for filing frivolous lawsuits or motions.

_ Interest on lawsuit awards would be set at the prime rate plus four percentage points. It's now fixed at 12 percent.

Under the compromise, the Senate gutted a similar House bill and inserted its version of the legislation. They also agreed to give that bill third reading Wednesday and send it to the House.

That's a "great step in the right direction," said House Speaker David Wilkins, R-Greenville.

But it's step that has taken time, thanks largely to two senators who tried to eliminate the liability sharing language. The Senate Judiciary Committee's version of the bill said people couldn't recover disproportionate awards from defendants who were less than 20 percent at fault.

Sen. Scott Richardson, R-Hilton Head Island, wasn't willing to start that low. He and Sen. Greg Ryberg, R-Aiken, had drawn fire from opponents and supporters alike for holding up the legislation.

"We held out and I think we got a better agreement," Richardson said.

"We won," Ryberg said.

The South Carolina Chamber of Commerce has made the issue its most important in the lawsuit limit debate. On Monday, chamber director Hunter Howard traveled the state with Gov. Mark Sanford and others to put pressure on individual senators to eliminate the practice that forces wealthy defendants to pay more than their share of a jury award, known as joint and several liability.

One of the their targets was Sen. John Hawkins, R-Spartanburg. He said the compromise was the best that could be made. "It's as fair as we can get it under the circumstances," Hawkins said.

Sanford may be willing to go along with the compromise because "politics is the art of the possible," his spokesman Will Folks said.

The bill's second reading approval came with the support of all but one senator - Sen. Phil Leventis, D-Sumter. The bill would hurt small, South Carolina businesses and help large, out-of-state corporations, Leventis said. "They'll send a legion of lawyers down here and use very spongy rules to avoid culpability," Leventis said.

"The whole problem with this tort reform movement is it takes away the rights of the injured victims," said Fayrell Furr, past president of the South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association. "At their expense, it puts money in the hands of corporations and insurance companies. It's not fair."