Mike Wilson, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Larry Walther

Summary

The court held that Wilson had taxpayer standing to pursue a public-funds illegal-exaction claim because the challenged appropriations implicated tax-derived funds in the state treasury. It further held that the controversy was not moot because substantial appropriated funds remained in CAPDD's possession and, alternatively, the issues fell within a public-interest exception to mootness. On the merits, the court held that the challenged acts were facially unconstitutional because the stated purpose of providing "grants" did not distinctly state the appropriation's purpose in the bill, reversing and remanding on the direct appeal while affirming on the cross-appeal. Justices Wood and Womack concurred in part and dissented in part, principally arguing that the claims against the State were moot and that the appropriations were constitutional.