Legal Opinion
Jibilian v. Franchise Tax Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 9, 2006No. B175952PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MALLANO, Acting P. J.
Tony and Dorothy Jibilian appeal from a judgment dismissing their second amended complaint for a tax refund after the trial court sustained the demurrer of defendant Franchise Tax Board (FTB). We affirm the judgment because the Jibilians’ wages are taxable and FTB was not required to follow deficiency assessment procedures in order to deny a refund of taxes paid.
BACKGROUND
The Jibilians, who describe themselves as “citizens” of the State of California, filed state income tax returns for the years 1999, 2000, and 2001 and paid taxes for those years of $61,542,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Lewis v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Moore v. ConliffeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Mudd v. McColganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Sunset Drive Corp. v. City of RedlandsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Title Insurance. Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Franchise Tax Bd. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Coast Community College Dist. v. Comm. on State MandatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2022
- DICON FIBEROPTICS, INC. v. Franchise Tax Bd.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- Jimena v. Wong CA2/2California Court of Appeal · 2013
- Nealy v. County of OrangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.