Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Bodman v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 8, 2013No. Appellate Case No. 2011-187466; No. 27248Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Pleicones

I concur in the judgment for the defendants, but write separately because I would decide the case on the ground that Bodman lacks standing. Bodman asserts that both taxpayer and “public importance” standing entitle him to maintain this declaratory judgment action challenging the constitutionality of certain tax statutes. While we permit generalized taxpayer standing when an individual seeks equitable relief, e.g., Myers *76v. Patterson, 315 S.C. 248, 433 S.E.2d 841 (1993), Bodman does not seek an injunction but rather requests we strike down numerous statutory provisions. Accordingly, he lacks…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. ATC South, Inc. v. Charleston CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2008
  2. Sloan v. Department of TransportationSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
  3. Sloan v. Department of TransportationSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2008
  4. Myers v. PattersonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API