Legal Opinion

St. Andrews Public Service District v. City Council

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided March 6, 2000No. 3128PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CONNOR, Judge:

The St. Andrews Public Service District (the PSD) brought a declaratory judgment action challenging two City of Charleston ordinances which annexed property into the City. The PSD claims that the annexations are “absolutely void as not authorized by law.” The PSD alleges the City has not complied with the statutory requirement of contiguity, and, therefore, has failed to comply with the statutes authorizing annexation by municipalities. The trial court held the PSD lacked standing and dismissed the suit. The PSD appeals. We reverse and remand.

This action involves the City’s…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Huntley v. PotterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  2. Bryant v. City of CharlestonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1988
  3. Glaze v. GroomsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
  4. Tovey v. City of CharlestonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1961
  5. Quinn v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. St. Andrews Public Service District v. City of CharlestonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  2. Sonoco Products Co. v. South Carolina Department of RevenueSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2008
  3. Board of County Commissioners v. City of CheyenneWyoming Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Beaufort County v. TraskCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2002
  5. BD. OF CTY. COM'RS OF LARAMIE v. CheyenneWyoming Supreme Court · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API