Legal Opinion

Mims v. Edgefield County Water & Sewer Authority

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 11, 1983No. 21852PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Harwell, Justice:

Appellant alleges the circuit court erred by declaring unenforceable a fee charged to respondent. We agree and reverse.

Respondent operates a retirement home located within appellant’s service area. Respondent’s building contains a fire sprinkler system consisting of 350 sprinkler heads. Appellant adopted a rate ordinance which provided for a sprinkler head charge on all fire sprinkler systems of $2.00 per sprinkler head per year. In 1978, respondent paid under protest appellant’s fee. After exhausting her administrative remedies, respondent initiated this action seeking a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
  3. Bluefield Water Works & Improvement Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  4. Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  5. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1978

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Palmetto Dunes Resort v. BrownCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
  2. May v. RileySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983
  3. S.C. Elec. v. RandallDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2018
  4. Richtex Corp. v. PilkingtonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983
  5. May v. RileySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API