Legal Opinion
Parmar v. Board of Equalization
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 14, 2011No. B215789PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PERLUSS, P. J.
Ashok V. Parmar, Pumima A. Parmar and Mahinder Parmar (collectively the Parmars) sued the State Board of Equalization (Board) for a refund of cigarette and tobacco taxes paid in part by them and in part on their behalf by their closely held corporation, Santos Agency, Inc. (Santos). Following a bench trial, the trial court found the taxes had been unlawfully assessed against the Parmars individually and granted the Parmars’ request for a refund of $69,762.95. The court also awarded the Parmars more than $600,000 in attorney fees under Code of Civil Procedure section…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Select Base Materials, Inc. v. Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Santisas v. GoodinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- City of Long Beach v. MansellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- Doers v. Golden Gate Bridge, Higway & Transportation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Day v. City of FontanaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Childhelp, Inc. v. City of L.A.California Court of Appeal · 2023
- Dept. of Corrections & Rehabilitation v. Super Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2023
- Merritt v. L.A. County Civil Service Commission CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Starbuzz Internat. v. Cal. Dept. of Tax and Fee Admin.California Court of Appeal · 2025