Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment
State ex rel. Macy v. Board of County Commissioners
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided June 1, 1999No. 89,496Published
1Concurring in the judgmentSummers, C.J.
¶ 1 I concur in the judgment and in most of the Court’s opinion. Where I depart is *1141from that language explaining why “The June 24,1996 Resolution” became ineffective. The opinion seems to contemplate as available to the Commissioners some kind of “protest” before the Excise Board. I have difficulty reconciling this language with our prior opinions and the relevant statutes.
¶ 2 The budget process of the “County Budget' Act” creates a budget for a county. The procedure of § 1415 is for the purpose of taxpayer protesting a county budget. The specific statute at issue, 19 O.S.1991 § 1415, states…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Reynolds v. PorterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
- Ross v. PetersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1993
- Brown v. FordSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
- City of Bethany v. Public Employees Relations BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.