Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Protected Service Rights-Water Service Made Available

WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 10, 2026//

Protected Service Rights-Water Service Made Available

WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//August 10, 2026//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Dupont Water Company, Inc. v. City of Madison, Indiana

Case No.: 25-3131

Officials: Scudder, Kirsch, and Taibleson, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Protected Service Rights-Water Service Made Available

found Jefferson County, Indiana, built a new jail outside the city limits of Madison, Indiana, and needed a reliable water supply for the facility. Dupont Water Company, a rural water association with outstanding federal loans, claimed exclusive service rights under 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b), which protects certain federally indebted water associations from competition within their service areas. The County initially sought water service from Dupont, but Dupont did not provide a proposed infrastructure plan or a rate estimate despite months of discussions. Because the jail required water service and Madison already had the necessary infrastructure and established rates, Jefferson County entered into an agreement with the City of Madison to provide water.

Dupont sued in district court alleging that Madison’s agreement to supply water violated Dupont’s protected service rights under § 1926(b). Jefferson County intervened and sought a declaration that its agreement with Madison was lawful. The district court granted summary judgment for Madison and Jefferson County, concluding that Dupont had not “provided or made available” water service to the jail and therefore could not invoke § 1926(b)’s protections.

The Seventh Circuit found that although Jefferson County had requested service from Dupont, Dupont failed to take the necessary steps to provide service, including developing infrastructure plans and offering a rate proposal within a reasonable timeframe. Because Dupont had not actually provided or made water service available to the jail, the court concluded that § 1926(b) did not prevent Madison from supplying water.

Affirmed.

Decided 08/05/26

Full Text

Polls

Has AI improved your efficiency at work?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

Case Digests

Sea all WLJ People

Legal Tech

See All Legal Tech News

Legal Tech Directory

Wisconsin Law Journal connects 640K legal professionals with leading technology and service providers nationwide.

Text Timeline

Mon Jul 13, 2026

FTO Checker

Mon Jun 22, 2026

Concord

Wed Jul 15, 2026

Nimbusnext Inc

Fri Jun 26, 2026

Opinion Digests