City of Camden v. Fairfield Electric Cooperative, Inc., 372 S.C. 543

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Carolina held that Fairfield Electric Cooperative lacked authority to continue providing electricity to a Lowe's store located on property annexed by the City of Camden. The court concluded that a security light on an otherwise unimproved tract did not constitute a building, structure, or facility that qualified as premises being served at the time of annexation under South Carolina law. The court affirmed the circuit court's summary judgment for the City.

Holdings

1. The property was not a premises then being served at the time of annexation because the security light on the unimproved lot was not a building, structure, or facility to which electricity was being furnished.
2. The security light was not a structure within the contemplation of S.C. Code Ann. § 33-49-250 and therefore did not preserve Fairfield's authority to serve the later-constructed Lowe's store.
3. The statute does not require continuous ownership of a premises; a cooperative may continue serving customers after a change in ownership, but it must have been serving a qualifying building, structure, or facility at the time of annexation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Lowe's store was a "premises then being served" when Camden annexed the property, so that Fairfield could continue serving the property under the annexation exception in S.C. Code Ann. § 33-49-250(1).
2. Whether Fairfield's pre-annexation service of a security light on an unimproved lot constituted service to a building, structure, or facility sufficient to preserve the cooperative's statutory authority to serve the later-constructed Lowe's store.

Disposition

affirmed