Legal Opinion

Michels v. Watson

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 31, 1964No. Civ. 27835PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLillie, J.

Defendant, Assessor of the County of Los Angeles, announced his intention to assess all property in the county at 25 per cent of its fair market value; plaintiff, a resident taxpayer and owner of a double-family dwelling, filed an action for declaratory relief to compel him to assess at full cash value. There were no oral proceedings before the trial court except argument. Determining the issues in favor of defendant, the judge concluded: “Article XI, section 12, of the California Constitution does not prohibit the assessment of taxable property by a county at a uniform fraction of its full…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Select Base Materials, Inc. v. Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. De Luz Homes, Inc. v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Coca-Cola Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Switz v. Township of MiddletownSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1957
  5. Kaiser Co. v. ReidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. County of Sacramento v. HickmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Knoff v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. County of Amador v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. Worthington v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. D'Amico v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

10 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