Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Tunica County, Mississippi v. Town of Tunica, Mississippi

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided May 11, 2017No. 2015-CA-01183-SCTPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

DICKINSON, PRESIDING JUSTICE,

CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART:

It is always a source of regret to me to be unable to concur in the conclusion reached by a majority of my Associates in the decision of any case, which regret is here more pronounced than usual for the reason that the construction placed by the majority of my Associates on the section of the Constitution here in question confers upon the Legislature the unlimited power to support the public schools which I think it should have, but to so concur would cause me to violate what seems to me the plain language of the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Moore v. MolpusMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Jones v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Richmond v. City of CorinthMississippi Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Fulgham v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Miller v. State ex rel. RussellMississippi Supreme Court · 1922

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API