Legal Opinion

Industrial Indemnity Co. v. City & County of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 14, 1990No. A044619PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CHANNELL, J.

In this case of first impression, we hold that a true sale and leaseback of real property—one that is not a financing transaction— constitutes a change in ownership within the meaning of Proposition 13, triggering reassessment of the property. (See Cal. Const., art. XIII A, § 2, subd. (a).)

I. Facts

In 1984, appellant Industrial Indemnity Company owned real property and improvements at 255 California Street in San Francisco. For the 1984-1985 tax year, respondent City and County of San Francisco had assessed property taxes against this property based on a full-value…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Cal. Drive-In Restaurant Assn. v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. People Ex Rel. Younger v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. County of RiversideCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Board of Supervisors v. LonerganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Alan v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Pacific Southwest Realty Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Azusa Land Reclamation Co. v. Main San Gabriel Basin WatermasterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
  4. Farm Sanctuary Inc. v. Dept. of Food and AgricultureCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  5. MHC Financing Limited Partnership Two v. City of SanteeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005

26 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