Mutual Life Insurance v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
1DissentMosk, J.
I dissent.
The majority’s construction of the “in lieu” provision creates a loophole in the tax laws in favor of insurance companies so sweeping, so obvious, and so burdensome on other taxpayers that it manifestly violates the intent of the voters in adopting section 28 of article XIII of our Constitution (section 28).
Without considering the language or history of subdivision (f) of that provision or the cases interpreting its language, it is obvious from the consequences which will follow the majority’s holding that the construction it advances is unsound. If, as the majority hold, an insurer…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
- People v. Lance W.California Supreme Court · 1985
- Moyer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Friends of Mammoth v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. Board of Equalization of CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.