Thiel v. Priest
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Tom Glaze, Justice.
In its 1999 regular session, the General Assembly enacted a number of statutory changes to require statewide county reappraisals over the next three years. See, e.g., Acts 1185, 933, and 974 of 1999. Concerned that these reappraisals would cause significant increases in assessed valuation and taxes, the General Assembly sought to limit the impact of such appraisals. In doing so, pursuant to art. 19, § 22, of the Arkansas Constitution, it adopted a proposed constitutional amendment (hereafter proposed Amendment No. 2). The amendment’s announced primary purpose, as set out in…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chaney v. BryantSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1976
- Becker v. McCuenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
- Donovan v. PriestSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
- Becker v. RiviereSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1982
- Zinger v. TerrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Kurrus Ex Rel. Arkansans to Protect Police, Libraries, Education, & Services (APPLES) v. PriestSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
- Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. Unigard Security InsuranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
- Scamardo v. JaggersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
- Forrester v. DanielsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2010
- Forrester v. MartinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2011
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.