Culligan Water Conditioning of Bellflower, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SULLIVAN, J.
Defendant State Board of Equalization (Board) appeals from a judgment granting plaintiff Culligan Water Conditioning of Bellflower, Inc. recovery of certain use taxes paid under protest.
The case was tried by the court, sitting without a jury, upon an agreed statement of facts. In substance the pertinent facts are as follows: Plaintiff is in the business of conditioning water at the point of use. Hard water contains calcium and magnesium, and these “hardness” ions cause it to be unsuitable in the home for doing the laundry or for washing and bathing. Plaintiff “softens” the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Merrill v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Pitts v. PerlussCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Carmona v. Division of Industrial SafetyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Henry's Restaurants of Pomona, Inc. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- King v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by108 opinions
- Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- California Assn. of Psychology Providers v. RankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Agnew v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Jeanene Harlick v. Blue Shield of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Robinson v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
103 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.