Legal Opinion · Dissent

Angus v. City of Myrtle Beach

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 31, 2005No. 25934Published

1DissentJustice Pleicones

I respectfully dissent. I agree that Myrtle Beach erred in relying upon non-statutory factors in computing the GO rollback millage. I would find, however, that Angus has shown no prejudice and would therefore affirm the circuit court’s order denying her relief.

At the time Myrtle Beach was calculating its 1999-2000 GO millage rate in June 1999, it was required to estimate the prior year’s property tax revenues since final figures are not provided to it by the county auditor until August. The city estimated its prior year’s revenue by applying an 86% “collection rate” to the overall amount…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. RIVERWOODS, LLC v. County of CharlestonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  2. County of Lee v. StevensSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1982
  3. Simkins v. City of SpartanburgSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API