Legal Opinion

Batt v. City & County of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 28, 2010No. A123253PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RICHMAN, J.

In Batt v. City and County of San Francisco (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 65 [65 Cal.Rptr.3d 716], we held that an individual could not maintain a class action for refund of a municipal tax absent statutory authorization. Unquestioned in our decision was the right of that individual to prosecute the action on her own behalf. That individual, plaintiff Angel Batt, thereafter had a bench trial on her claim that the City and County of San Francisco (the City) improperly required hoteliers to apply the City’s hotel *167tax to parking charges, challenging the validity of the administrative…

2Cases cited55 opinions

  1. Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Birkenfeld v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Burden v. SnowdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  4. No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Ramirez v. Yosemite Water CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Batt v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API