Legal Opinion
Slocum v. State Board of Equalization
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 9, 2005No. A107905PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
REARDON, Acting P. J.
Recognizing that in the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, “[a]ccess to airport property throughout California was restricted,” in 2002 the California State Board of Equalization (SBE or board) promulgated a regulation to permit midyear reassessment of property suffering loss in value because of such diminished access. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 18, § 139 (hereafter, Rule 139).) Entitled “Restricted Access as Damage Eligible for Reassessment Relief Pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 170,” the SBE specifically drafted Rule 139 with air carriers…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Mercer v. PerezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Ramirez v. Yosemite Water CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Kaufman & Broad Communities, Inc. v. Performance Plastering, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Edgerly v. City of OaklandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- California School Boards Ass'n v. State Board of EducationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Barrese v. MurrayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- City of Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles Employee Relations BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Tower Lane Properties v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.