Section 32 Standing

LibraryTax Law 2009

Section 23 of the Hancock Amendment (or Hancock), Mo. Const. art. X, §§ 16–24, provides that “any taxpayer of the state, county, or other political subdivision shall have standing to bring suit in a circuit court of proper venue and additionally, when the state is involved, in the Missouri supreme court, to enforce the provisions of sections 16 through 22 . . . .” Mo. Const. art. X, § 23.

The question of standing was first raised in Roberts v. McNary, 636 S.W.2d 332 (Mo. banc 1982), discussed in §2.21 above. In that case, the defendant city argued that the plaintiff lacked standing to bring a Hancock suit because she had failed to demonstrate that she had a legally protected interest or that she had, in fact, sustained damage as a result of the fee increase. The Court rejected that argument, stating that any taxpayer had standing to bring a Hancock challenge under § 23.

The Supreme Court of Missouri held that the language of § 23 clearly limits the class of persons who can bring suit to enforce the Hancock Amendment; only taxpayers have standing to bring such a suit. See Fort Zumwalt Sch. Dist. v. State, 896 S.W.2d 918, 923 (Mo. banc 1995). “Section 23 recognizes that any apparent injury to the school district is merely derivative of the taxpayers’ injury.” Id. at 921 (citing Bartlett v. Ross, 891 S.W.2d 114, 116 (Mo. banc 1995) (school district does not have standing in tax protests before State Tax...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT