Davis Adv. Sh. No. 4
S.E. 2d

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Supreme Court

Plum Creek Development Company, Inc., Petitioner,

v.

The City of Conway, A Municipal Corporation, Respondent.



ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF

APPEALS

Appeal From Horry County

David H. Maring, Sr., Circuit Court Judge

Opinion No. 24886

Heard December 3, 1998 - Filed January 25, 1999

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED



John P. Henry and Philip C. Thompson, both of The Thompson Law Firm, P.A., of Conway, for petitioner.

W. Cliff Moore, III, and Andrew F. Lindemann of Ellis, Lawhorne, Davidson & Sims, P.A., of Columbia, for respondent.



BURNETT, A.J.: We granted Plum Creek Development Company, Inc.'s (Plum Creek's) petition for a writ of certiorari to review

p.12


PLUM CREEK DEVELOPMENT v. THE CITY OF CONWAY





the decision of the Court of Appeals in Plum Creek v. The City of Conway, 328 S.C. 347, 491 S.E.2d 692 (Ct. App. 1997). We affirm as modified.





In November 1991, Plum Creek acquired property for a residential development. Respondent The City of Conway (City) refused to provide water and sewer service to the development unless it was annexed.





In 1992, Plum Creek petitioned the lower court for a writ of mandamus to require City to provide water and sewer service for the development without annexation. Plum Creek claimed it was entitled to utility service as an assignee of an easement agreement and as a third- party beneficiary of City's agreement with the Grand Strand Water & Sewer Authority (the Authority). In June 1993, the master-in-equity issued a writ of mandamus, finding neither the easement nor the City's agreement with the Authority required annexation as a condition precedent to utility service. City appealed. It did not move to stay the enforcement of the writ during the pendency of its appeal.1 This Court affirmed. Plum Creek D