Legal Opinion
City of Santa Cruz v. Patel
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 18, 2007No. H030689PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PREMO, J.
I. Introduction
Appellants are the operators of nine hotels in the City of Santa Cruz (City). Appellants challenge the superior court’s orders directing them to comply with subpoenas issued by City pursuant to Government Code section 37104 et seq., requiring the production of records necessary for a tax compliance audit. The tax in question is City’s transient occupancy tax, a 10 percent tax upon stays of 30 days or less at hotels, motels, and like accommodations within the City. (Santa Cruz Mun. Code, § 3.28.010 et seq. (SCMC).) Appellants contend that they should not be…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Hill v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Gregory v. AshcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- City of Chicago v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Dana Point Safe Harbor Collective v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- In re Marriage of Rifkin & CartyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- State Ex Rel. Department of Pesticide Regulation v. Pet Food Express Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Shaoxing County Huayue Import & Export v. BhaumikCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Ashford Hospitality v. City & County of S.F.California Court of Appeal · 2021
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.