Legal Opinion · Dissent

Knight v. Salisbury

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided June 17, 1974No. 19842Published

1DissentBussey, Justice

(dissenting) :

Being convinced that the judgment below was erroneous, I must dissent. The opinion of Mr. Justice Littlejohn does not, in my view, state, answer or squarely deal with the serious questions raised in the briefs of the appellants.

Essentially the judgment below, and the opinion affirming the same, rest upon two basic premises or holdings, as follows:

1. Section 7 of Article 8 of the Constitution, as amended, provides authority for an established county government to levy taxes and issue bonds to provide for recreational facili*577ties, thus by implication repealing Section 6 of Article…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ashmore v. Greater Greenville Sewer Dist.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1947
  2. Berry v. MillikenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1959
  3. State v. HoodSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1936
  4. Bray v. City CouncilSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1901
  5. Evatte v. CASS, MAYORSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1950

1 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