one four days three eight six six on the county board of commissioners versus village of lordstown ohio at all fifteen minutes for the plaintiff fifteen minutes to be shared by the defendants mr hoyer for the i didn't find that contract in the record and there's two service contracts there's an o and m and a treatment contract entered into between the village and the city to provide service for the new the new wastewater treatment lines that were installed part of which was to serve our existing customers and general motors is not a contract with g m there's a contract between them creating the ability to serv between themselves which they're not using to servia that is correct or are yes they don't know why and they recognize the statute that prevents them from doing that the why is the case right to cases right because all the conditions in the statute have been met we don't have to prove that they're on the front doorstep of general motors knocking on the door this court's decisions in ross county adams county because that's because of the statute as broadly written the statute says that during the term of the loan no curtailment of service is allowed which is a very broad term it's been curtailed that's what i really trying to figure out what has been curtailed what has the war again if it goes to your it your honor it goes to the definition of curtailment which is incredibly broad which includes just any acts that they take the efforts that they undertake to provide service or your compromising service to g m yes we are so your service to g m has not been curtailed so you're saying as this court interprets beat dog dog won't bite pig pig want to go over the stile so we won't get home tonight and we should be saying there right there we're going to issue an injunction your honor the statute is required to be broadly construed and this court has construed it broadly in two cases in that include in english i mean no i mean i'm trying to answer i'm trying to answer your question in ross county this court entered a farm and an injunction for the county against the city a chill a coffee just for construction of sewer lines no solicitation at all just constructing a sewer li that it might make sense if you if the people you're suing we're doing something that could be done only for the purpose of curtailing you could say that it's a step towards curtailing and ought to be stopped because the only purpose is towards curtailing i could understand that but i don't see how that's the case here where the legal probation only lasts as long as they're paying this federal debt county it was only a contract no construction at all it was a contract that would have allowed manchester to provide the water to west west union which was already being served by the indebted association that was in joint by this court as constituting illegal curtailment they hadn't even constructed a sewer line yet but it's so here we have not only sewer lines we have contracts we have a design engineer who with the with the with the people in the area that they were supposed to be serving problem service to know the contract here about the contract in the case here citing  in adams county in two thousand this court made a finding affirming an injunction for nothing more than a contract that would allow whom it was between the village of west union ever did right through your pipes from dns paying their bills presumably what is your injury our injury is our injury beyond here our injury is based on a risk it's a worry that's not right right and it's not it's not we can't count it today because you're right the bob's in audio it has a mentor what is your injury if not an injury it is not taxed here standing here but under this statute that's that's what's most important under the statute it is an injury and it's an injury that this court has called an injury in previous cases under less circumstances than this in two thousand and eleven we call yes i could see how that's an or if if turning the thing on would automatically be an injury but i don't see how that's the case if once the loans paid off it's perfectly ok to use that they're just with they're just building something for all we know that's designed for the day when it's legal to use and it's easier to build it now than it would be to build it later when it is legal so we're building something that we hope and pray that we'll be able to use legally in the future your honor there are two arms but he's going to wait them the greatest protection to make sure they get paid that's paramount no one has done one single thing to infringe on that one being paid have they have curtailed the service as defined by this court under the sta single drop of sewage has yet gone into their pipes that's correct as phenomenon yes what's really been curtailed here i'm guessing is the ability to get attorney's fees is that right without the injunction and with that here are two things there aren't one is there their statement that we now know that we can't get this service because of the loans until they are up that didn't happen until the case was over two years old and we had filed the lawsuit is an affidavit at the end of summary judgment but a little tad late at that point i only did the statute i'm sorry as they hadn't violated the statute in the less we are willing to say that curtailment means thinking about doing something your honor they did much with all due respect they did a lot more than just think about it well developed the lines you know they would rather even a million dollars they'd built the lines so that when they could legally contract to provide the service they'd be in a position to do that they did and i don't think there's any dispute about that but but unless we are willing to say that kurt the omen means the possibility of being able to do something when you're legally allowed to do it then there hasn't been any curtailment well unless you're going to overturn ross county in two thousand and eleven i thought at all that did in ross county the contract with ross county is due to a different from adams county who were also county in ross county is two thousand and eleven wh limit they were and they were here to territory that subject to the right no no the sewer line is just million dollars of sewer or some is out some is in a million dollars of the project is there in our service district going right in our district right up to the good morning in may it please the court my name is matthew van such and it's an honor to be here to represent the village of lordstown who was also represented here today by the honorable mayor arnaud hill i would like to use eight minutes of the fifteen minutes allotted to at lease and share the competing municipalities actual provision of service to an indebted associations customer second the village has not provided such service or even attempted to provide such service to the county's existing customer general motors third the county service that it has made available to general motors has not been limited or curtailed by the villages action injunctive relief is not necessary to ensure the continued uninterrupted service to g m by the county i wouldn't you at the outset of this litigation indicate that you will not provide this service until the loans are paid off your honor i cannot answer that question today would have been handy if you had you know avoided an injunction trying to get you to do that it might have been and as the mayor and i really just state right now that you will not that is correct your honor that under the statute undertaking your giving to the court that is on the record that your village will not without permission from your opposing counsel from your balls and parties you will not provide that service and that is correct because that statement has already been made to the district court and we are relying on that statement yes you are this is this your r s this case has been going on since i've been a turn is actually one of the first cases that i saw start working on ten years ago so we're here at what we believe is the final step in this case and i would like to distinguish if i could the the ross county case which your honor correctly distinguished was that the disputed area here in that case or in that case was truly disputed and pipes were run through that disputed area in this case we have a distinguished point two points primarily on one the mobile home park we have the legal right to serve that's been conceded and so that one thousand four hundred feet which the district court said was intended to serve general motors don't believe is an accurate statement of the record because without that nine thousand four hundred feet we wouldn't be able to serve the imperial mobile home park and the county has argued argued before that they could just simply cut across the street and go to the counties line but that's not relevant to the issue now he is not challenging at this point on appeal your ability to provide service to  the customers correct and we believe that's an important distinction and that had really can't say that you haven't done things which are going to cause them to fear losing their biggest customer no i will not i will when you spend a lot of money and it looks like the purpose of spending that money is to take away their customer you've got to say that they're nervous over there that you're going to take away their costs isn't that true that is very true your honor and i will not deny that if you can't legally take away their customer for a long time maybe they could seek an injunction to keep you from taking away their customers and then when you wait for months years how long before you even say we won't take your customer until it's legal to do so that makes it look even more like your might be willing to take their house and i can see that and so now you say oh well we never intended to do that it's a little late in the day those a well your honor i'd like to make two points on that number one g m is critical to the future  mahoning valley and the county in the village i would think we both can see the point that we both want to make sure that it stays there and that was send that but you both want to be your customer there was some talk of that yes happening in the future but l in which the city had promised to sell water to a certain property owner if the properties were detached from the rural water district and the eighth circuit said we can't give you an injunction that says if something happens you can't do this and that's the situation that we're in exactly in this case in that case again it's the cure any case a r and b why it was cited in our brief and so in that case you know there was a detachment proceeding that was going on but the eighth circuit said we're not sure if that detachment is actually going to happen and so that's what makes it speculative and the injury here your honor is not certainly impending which is the standard for the ripeness in which would be procured for a permit injunction if once the statute is no longer a problem that is to say once the law already has been so there isn't any statutory impediment to your trying to compete for this business she is there any other legal reason why you couldn't compete for that business i'm not aware of any other reason no your honor not though it is done deal not and certainly not so how would your getting that business after the statute is no longer applicable after the young well i'm looking a little bit rightness but what i'm one trying to figure out is if right now the problem is that the statute says nobody can do anything that's going to in any way curtail the service because that's how we get paid back when that is no longer the case is there any legal impediment to your competing to serve g m competing with the county to serve the i'm not aware of any you're on it so how would your getting that be illegal getting g m s business be illegally cognize the injury to the county i'm don't believe that it would be ok and i want to just address one related point on that and i believe it was raised before you  simply turn a press a button and suddenly g m is connected there's practical construction related and legal and legal steps that would have to take place and they say because involves public entities would take several months to do and would be happening in public and i counted seven of them if you would indulge me for one second first of all you make that much difference if you're going to go through also there's i counted seven different whether you push the plug or whether you are a turn the spigot or whether you have to go through seven legal hoops before you turn spigot i think it's important to because what it's saying is that there are as we discuss what the right in this case is that there would be opportunity for the county to come in should any one of those steps happen and say look you're doing something other than just standing here that sort of thing is this just the absence of an injury all together right now in your view is it right this thing how would you distinguish which standing sub variant you and i believe that it's more of a rightness issue because there is not certainly in play and how would you distinguish between just no injury altogether see e g mu han versus the rights issue here what's the difference if i may answer your honor i'm not sure that i think it melts in between the two of them and i really i really i really couldn't i really couldn't answer that question that's very thank you thank you morning your honor my name is tom wilson i have the privilege here of representing the city of warren ohio we are one of the two defendants in this particular case we moved the court today  to confirm the decision by the district court granting judgment to the city of warren on out all counts and in particular the only remaining counts that have been presented to this court the eighth ninth and tenth of the plaintiff's complaint the plaintiff here has from the time this case began until the time we got the decision from the  trial court and to a present made some significant changes in the direction of their case and i think your honor that would help answer perhaps the last question as to whether this is a rightness issue or there is simply no evidence of a violation of the curtailment statute when this case began they were attempting to stop any and all efforts by the village to provide sewer on the east side and they have since stepped away from that and said go ahead you village put the sewers in on the east side go ahead enter into your treatment contract as well as your contract for owen m operation and maintenance with the city of warren we're not worried about any of that our only concern here is potentially losing our largest customer which is general motors and i think by taking that step after the decision came from the district court they have not only highlighted that they aren't able to prove a violation of the statute certainly not as to the city of warren but also that this matter is not right because they continue to serve general motors the county does and as to my client the city of warrant our contract as the trial court found between the county and the city has never been breached and that we continue to accept all the  fluent provided by the county in this part of our county and we have never been unable to service there the contract that we have with them and then as to  having not violated any contract we had with the county having the authority to enter into those and factually all we have done we take the affluent from this part of the county we are if you will the only game in town and we accept that and we've continued to accept it and we will continue to do that in the future by agreeing to take i'll see if there are only argument on at this stage of the appeal is a nine hundred twenty six argument about curtailment i don't see how are one step removed from any claim as to the village we didn't feel we were asked only to accept the a fluent we can we are to take general motors a fluent if you will and they came to us and they said  your city is absolutely right your honor i have learned in my years having the opportunity to do this that if there are no other questions even with time remaining i will biju a good lesson for these  not not brought up at sixty one seventeen zero four five and six revised code it's not an issue in the case that statute says that once we have the sewer lines there whether or  lines in your honor thinking that oh gee when the loans are up we'll have complete legal authority to go ahead and put it in there's a statute a bit of help by the house supreme court and though it was you wanted based on that statute you could file for one concern i understand yes your honor the only one you preserved on this appeal correct the reason we don't care about the eros of the side sewers is because it's never going to pay for itself we've done the analysis we didn't follow it up so we're not going forward with those issues so ok we're happy to write thank you the what's important to us as far as the rightness issue in abit and in the versus nashville it all has to be a stretch and sufficiently threatened to to for it to be ripe as opposed to being unripe if i have a if you and i have a contract and we have a disagreement over the legal rights of the parties under that contract i don't have to wait until you violate the contract i can go to court and get a declaration of what our respective rights are under the contract it's loretta i laid it but if it looks like they're going to do something legal i mean what it looks like to me i don't know we talk about motivations i don't see that it's necessarily attorney's fees maybe it is seems to me what you're trying to do is to make it harder for them to do what is legally permissible for them to do once the loans are paid deny that we would even be here if the if they had been willing to enter into an injunction that at the time the all suit was filed without the injunction we don't have the protection we haven't we have an affidavit of a former mayor that's not binding on either of the parties neither one so all they have to do is knock on g m store a yes or a they at some point some point your loans are going to be out at some point the per script in the federal statute one hundred twenty six is graphic they they are entitled to put themselves in a position to compete with you at least so far as hundred twenty six is concerned when that time comes they don't have to sit on their hands and effect give you an additional period in fact of monopoly because they've been able not to do any digging before th