Legal Opinion
Lamm v. Barber
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided March 4, 1977No. 27448PublishedCited by 72 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Carrigan
The respondents, three county assessors, have refused to implement increases in their respective assessment abstracts as ordered by the State Board of Equalization (hereinafter referred to as State Board). The State Board, as petitioner, seek enforcement of that order in this original proceeding. We issued a rule to show cause why mandamus should not issue to compel the respondents to effectuate the ordered increases. We now make the rule absolute.
*515The state constitution provides:
“As may be provided by law, the state board of equalization shall review the valuations determined for assessment…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Phillips v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of EqualizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Dodge v. OsbornSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Romer v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1998
- Denver Urban Renewal Authority v. ByrneSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
- deKoevend v. Board of Education of West End School District RE-2Supreme Court of Colorado · 1984
- City of Golden v. ParkerSupreme Court of Colorado · 2006
- Teasel v. Department of Mental HealthMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.