Legal Opinion
Patton v. South Carolina Public Service Commission
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided January 19, 1984No. 22033PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Harwell, Justice:
In this utility rate case, appellant Ray F. Patton, Jr., appeals from a South Carolina Public Service Commission Order affirmed by the Circuit Court. We affirm and adopt so much of the court’s order as is applicable to this appeal.
Appellant owns and operates a sole proprietorship, PPR & M Environmental Systems Company (PPR & M), which provides sewerage service to eight residential subdivisions, three commercial customers, and one elementary school in the upstate. On May 30,1980, PPR & M filed an application with the respondent Public Service Commission (the Commission)…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Bluefield Water Works & Improvement Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Lark v. Bi-Lo, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1981
- State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. General Telephone Co. of the SoutheastSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1978
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Kiawah Property Owners Group v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2004
- Nucor Steel v. South Carolina Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
- GTE Sprint Communications Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1986
- Leventis v. South Carolina Department of Health & Environmental ControlCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2000
- Porter v. South Carolina Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.