Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

S. Carolina v. N. Carolina, No. 138

By FindLaw Staff on January 20, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In an original jurisdiction action by South Carolina seeking an equitable apportionment with North Carolina of the Catawba River's waters, the special master's grant of three nonparties' motions to intervene is affirmed in part as to two of them where: 1) the Catawba River Water Supply Project was properly permitted to intervene because it showed a compelling interest in protecting the viability of its operations, which were premised on a fine balance between the joint venture's two participating counties; and 2) Duke Energy was also properly allowed to intervene because it was likely that any equitable apportionment of the river would need to take into account the amount of water that Duke Energy needed to sustain its operations.  However, the order is reversed in part where the interest of Charlotte, North Carolina was not sufficiently unique and would be properly represented by North Carolina.

Read S. Carolina v. N. Carolina, No. 138

Appellate Information

Argued October 13, 2009

Decided January 20, 2010


Opinion by Justice Alito

Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Chief Justice Roberts

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard