Legal Opinion

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. State Board of Equalization

California Supreme Court

Decided November 30, 1956No. L. A. 23712; L. A. 23713; L. A. 23714PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarter, J.

Defendants, the State Board of Equalization and others, appeal from judgments for plaintiffs, insurance *386companies, in their actions to recover taxes on their gross premiums paid under protest, together with interest on the sums.

It was stipulated that the method of conducting the bail bond business (it is a tax on premiums for such bonds which are here involved) by plaintiff companies and their agents was substantially as follows: “P, a prisoner, contacts B, a bail agent, to secure his release from jail. If B holds a bail permittee license he first decides whether to post cash bail or a bail…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Farrell v. County of PlacerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. County of San Diego v. California Water & Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Times-Mirror Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Hotel Kingkade v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1950
  5. La Societe Francaise De Bienfaisance Mutuelle v. California EmploymentCommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. City of Long Beach v. MansellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Driscoll v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  3. California Cigarette Concessions, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  4. People v. Department of Housing & Community DevelopmentCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. IBM Personal Pension Plan v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005

30 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