Legal Opinion
Pajaro Valley Bank v. County of Santa Cruz
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 13, 1962No. Civ. 20266; Civ. 20267; Civ. 20268; Civ. 20269PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDevine, J.
Four cases have been consolidated, in three of which banks are respondents, and in the fourth, a realty-owning corporation; and in all four eases the County of Santa Cruz is appellant. Respondents are plaintiffs in actions to recover taxes paid under protest. The question is whether certain safe-deposit boxes and their metal containers are taxable real property, as fixtures, or personal property and nontaxable, as the trial court found them to be.
The facts have been agreed upon. Pajaro Valley Bank is an independent bank operating in Watsonville, California. The safe-deposit boxes upon which…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- San Diego Trust & Savings Bank v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Trabue Pittman Corp. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- City of Los Angeles v. KlinkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Southern California Telephone Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- United Pacific Insurance v. CannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
3Cited by9 opinions
- Seatrain Terminals of California, Inc. v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Bostian v. Franklin State BankNew Jersey Tax Court · 1980
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- County of Ventura v. Channel Islands State BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Specialty Restaurants Corp. v. CTY. OF LOS ANGELESCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.