This case challenged the constitutionality of a $3 surcharge imposed on litigants in municipal court for the sheriff’s retirement fund. The trial court dismissed for lack of standing. The appellants claimed to have standing as taxpayers, administrators, and as one who paid the surcharge. Also, the administrators argue that they could be sued for assessing and collecting an unconstitutional surcharge.
Holding
None of the appellants have standing. Those who brought the claim as taxpayers could not establish that is was a direct expenditure. The administrators’ claims were speculative, no lawsuits were threatened. Further, they were not the ultimate recipients of the surcharge. Finally, the appellant who paid the surcharge did not ask for reimbursement, only declarative and injunctive relief. He did not have standing because the remedy would not address his injury.
You can read the full text of the decision here.