# Board of County Commisioners v. City of Muskogee

> Supreme Court of Oklahoma · November 5, 1991 · 62 O.B.A.J. 3429

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9613642

## Case

- **Full name:** The BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MUSKOGEE COUNTY, Oklahoma, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the CITY OF MUSKOGEE, Defendant-Appellee; The BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MUSKOGEE COUNTY, Oklahoma, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. the BOARD OF EDUCATION OF MUSKOGEE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, DISTRICT 1-20, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** November 5, 1991
- **Citations:** 62 O.B.A.J. 3429; 820 P.2d 797; 1991 OK 115; 1991 Okla. LEXIS 124; 1991 WL 226528
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Simms
- **Judges:** Alma, Doolin, Hargrave, Hodges, Kauger, Lavender, Opala, Simms, Summers, Wilson
- **Cited by:** 12 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Overruled on other grounds by Clay v. Independent School District No. 1 of Tulsa County, 68 O.B.A.J. 559 (1997).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9613642

## Opinion text

SIMMS, Justice,
concurring in part, dissenting in part:
I would affirm the trial court in all respects. The use of sinking funds to pay for revaluation costs is beyond the limits placed on those funds by Art. 10, § 28. Additionally, I agree with Justice Wilson that the majority’s authorization of this payment from sinking fund revenues is not rendered permissible by its depiction of the obligation as now being a “judgment”. That rationale is illusory and unconvincing.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9613642. Public record. Not legal advice.