1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 81 P.3d
  5. 81 P.3d 662 (2003)
 

TULSA COUNTY BUDGET BOARD v. TULSA COUNTY EXCISE BOARD

No. 98,780.

81 P.3d 662 (2003)

2003 OK 103

The TULSA COUNTY BUDGET BOARD and the Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa County, Ken Yazel, in his Capacity as Tulsa County Assessor and Member of the Tulsa County Budget Board, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. The TULSA COUNTY EXCISE BOARD, Byron Burke and Janice Lintelman, Members in their Official Capacities, Defendants/Appellees, Independent School District No. 1 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Tulsa School District"), Independent School District No. 9 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Union School District"), Independent School District No. 5 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Jenks School District"), Independent School District No. 3 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Broken Arrow School District"), District No. 11 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Owasso School District"), District No. 2 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Sand Springs School District"), Independent School District No. 13 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Glenpool School District"), Independent School District No. 8 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Sperry School District"), Independent School District No. 14 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (The "Liberty School District") and Tulsa Technology Center School District, d/b/a Tulsa Technology Center (The "Tulsa Technology Center"), Intervenor Defendants/Appellees.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

December 2, 2003.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Robert A. Nance, Gretchen M. Schilling, Oklahoma City, OK, for Plaintiffs/Appellants.

Scott D. Boughton, Assistant Attorney General, Oklahoma City, OK, for Defendants/Appellees.

J. Douglas Mann, Jerry A. Richardson, Oklahoma City, OK, for Intervenors/Defendants/Appellees.

KAUGER, J.

¶ 1 The issues presented are: 1) whether the defendant/appellee, Tulsa County Excise Board (Excise Board), has authority to review the budget of the plaintiff/appellant, Tulsa County Assessor (Assessor); and 2) if so, whether the Excise Board abused its discretion or acted arbitrarily or capriciously in reducing the visual inspection budget. We determine that the Excise Board may resolve funding disputes concerning the visual inspection budget. We...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases