Legal Opinion

Massongill v. County of Scott

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 16, 1997No. 96-992PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tom Glaze, Justice.

Appellant Doyle Massongill filed this illegal-taxation class-action suit against appellants Scott County Judge and the Scott County Quorum Court members (hereinafter the County), challenging the validity of two ordinances, 92-3 and 95-3, as amended by 96-3 (hereinafter 96-3). Ordinance 92-3 was enacted on January 13, 1992, and it provided for a solid-waste management program for the County and established a solid-waste collection and disposal fee for households and businesses located in the County. Ordinance 96-3 was enacted on January 3, 1996, and it provided Quorum Court…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Dreyfus v. BooneSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
  2. Geurin v. City of Little RockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1941
  3. Beaumont v. FaubusSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1965
  4. Earwood v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1955
  5. Foster v. GravesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Massongill v. County of ScottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  2. Massongill v. County of ScottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  3. Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports1999
  4. Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports1998
  5. Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports2008

7 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