Legal Opinion

City of San Jose v. Carlson

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 25, 1997No. H014572PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ELIA, Acting P. J.

In this appeal, the City of San Jose (City) challenges a determination by the superior court that short-term users of City facilities hold a taxable “possessory interest” in the facilities when they obtain use permits upon more than one occasion. We conclude that these uses were correctly found to be taxable possessory interests within the meaning of Revenue and Taxation Code section 107. Accordingly, we will affirm the judgment.

Background

The City owns and operates the San Jose McEnery Convention Center and Cultural Facilities (facilities). Respondent Alfred E.…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Kaiser Co. v. ReidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. People v. ShearerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Board of Supervisors v. ArcherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  4. Texas Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  5. United States v. County of FresnoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Sacramento County Fire Protection District v. Sacramento County Assessment Appeals Board IICalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  2. City & County of San Francisco v. Flying Dutchman Park, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
  3. DISTRICT v. BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  4. Cantina Grill, JV v. City & County of Denver County Board of Equalization Ex Rel. KennedySupreme Court of Colorado · 2015
  5. San Jose Parking, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API