Williamsburg Rural Water v. Williamsburg Cnty. Water, 2007-MO-071

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
• Writing for the Court: WALLER, JUSTICE
• Parties: Williamsburg Rural Water and Sewer Company, Inc., Appellant, v. Williamsburg County Water and Sewer Authority, A Body Politic, County of Williamsburg, A Body Politic, Town of Kingstree, A Body Politic, City of Lake City, A Body Politic, Town of Stuckey, A Body Politic and Town of Andrews, A Body Politic, Respondents.
• Decision Date: 17 December 2007
• Docket Number: 2007-MO-071

Williamsburg Rural Water and Sewer Company, Inc., Appellant,
v.
Williamsburg County Water and Sewer Authority, A Body Politic, County of Williamsburg, A Body Politic, Town of Kingstree, A Body Politic, City of Lake City, A Body Politic, Town of Stuckey, A Body Politic and Town of Andrews, A Body Politic, Respondents.

No. 2007-MO-071

Supreme Court of South Carolina

December 17, 2007

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

Heard September 20, 2007

Appeal From Williamsburg County, Thomas W. Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Larry G. Reddeck, of Nettles, Turbeville & Reddeck, of Lake City, for Appellant.

Mark W. Buyck, Jr., Mark W. Buyck, III, both of Wilcox, Buyck & Williams, of Florence, W.E. Jenkinson, III, Ernest J. Jarrett, both of Jenkinson, Jarrett & Kellahan, of Kingstree, and William A. Bryan, Jr., of Collins & Lacy, of Columbia, for Respondents.

WALLER, JUSTICE

These are consolidated appeals from orders of the circuit court relating to the provision of water and sewer services in Williamsburg County. We affirm in part and remand.

FACTS

The Williamsburg Rural Water and Sewer Company (WRWSC) was organized as a not-for-profit corporation in late 1994-early 1995 for the purpose of providing water and sewer service to unincorporated areas of Williamsburg County. At the time of its organization, WRWSC gave the County notice of its intent to serve certain areas, as well as proposed service area maps. County did not respond to WRWSC's notice but, instead, enacted an ordinance under which County could expand its own water and sewer services into the areas.

In 1998, WRWSC commenced an action against County, contending it had the exclusive right to serve the areas in question; WRWSC also sought an injunction to prevent County from extending its lines and providing service in the area. The circuit court granted County's motion for summary judgment, finding WRWSC did not have an exclusive right to serve the area. The Court of Appeals affirmed this ruling. Williamsburg Rural Water and Sewer Co., Inc. v. Williamsburg County Water and Sewer Authority, 357 S.C. 251, 593 S.E.2d 154 (Ct. App. 2003). This Court reversed the grant of summary judgment to County. Williamsburg Rural Water and Sewer Co., Inc. v. Williamsburg County Water and Sewer Authority, 367 S.C. 566, 627 S.E.2d 690 (2006) (Williamsburg I). We held the County's failure to respond to WRWSC's notice of intent to provide services within ninety days resulted in WRWSC obtaining an exclusive right to serve the area. The matter was remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.

After our opinion in Williamsburg I was issued, County filed an action seeking to condemn WRWSC's franchise rights (the Condemnation Action). Thereafter, WRWSC filed motions to declare County's franchises void; it also filed motions for permanent injunctions and restraining orders, contending, pursuant to Williamsburg I, that it had the exclusive right to provide water and sewer service in the area (the Exclusive Franchise Area action, or EFA). ^[1]

On June 12, 2006, WRWSC filed an action challenging County's right to condemn its franchise rights (the Challenge Action). The Challenge Action also sought an automatic stay of the condemnation action, and sought compensation for County's inverse condemnation of and infringement upon WRWSC's exclusive service rights. WRWSC also sought an order declaring all franchises previously granted by County null and void. The Challenge Action lists County, the Town of Kingstree, the City of Lake City, and the Towns of Stuckey and Andrews as defendants. ^[2]

WRWSC then filed a motion for summary judgment in the EFA action, seeking a declaration that County was without authority to issue franchises in WRWSC's exclusive area, and an order declaring all franchises issued by County null and void. WRWSC also requested orders permanently enjoining County from taking any further action to provide water/sewer service, and requiring it to cease and desist from continuing to provide water and sewer service in those areas previously granted franchises.

In an order dated August 18, 2006, the circuit court made the following rulings. In the EFA action, the court ruled that because WRWSC had not named all franchise holders (the Towns of Stuckey, Andrews and Lake...