State Bd. of Equalization v. Ceniceros
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McKINSTER, Acting P. J.
Contending that the County of Riverside had adopted a rule governing discovery in assessment appeals proceedings which was contrary to and thus preempted by state law, the State Board of Equalization (SBE) petitioned the trial court for a writ of mandate to force the county to comply with state law. The trial court concluded that the local rule was not preempted by state law, and denied the petition. The SBE appeals. We affirm.
Introduction
In the abstract, the imposition and collection of property taxes consists of four major steps: assessment, equalization,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- Morehart v. County of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Roberts v. City of PalmdaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Candid Enterprises, Inc. v. Grossmont Union High School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- City & County of SF v. All Persons Interested in Matter of Prop. GCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- City and County of S.F. v. All Persons Interested etc.California Court of Appeal · 2021