Hartford v. County of Los Angeles
HUNTINGTON HARTFORD, as Trustee, etc., and v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, and
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Louis H. Burke (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Burke
BURKE, P. J Plaintiff sued for a refund of ad valorem taxes levied against its property for the years 1954 to 1957, on the ground that the property was exempt from taxation under the so-called “welfare exemption.” Recovery was denied by the trial court on the ground that, although plaintiff had taken all necessary procedural steps to claim the exemption prior to paying the taxes, it had not filed its refund claims within the three-year period set forth in section 5097 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. Plaintiff’s contention that compliance with this provision was not required by the refund statute (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 268) was expressly rejected by Division Two of this court in Samarkand of Santa Barbara, Inc. v. County of Santa Barbara, 216 Cal.App.2d 341 [31 Cal.Rptr. 151] (hearing in Supreme Court denied).
On the authority of that ease, the judgment is affirmed.
Jefferson, J., and Kingsley, J., concurred.
*614Appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied September 18, 1963. Peters, J., was of the opinion that the petition should be granted.
Cites, in this corpus
- Samarkand of Santa Barbara, Inc. v. County of Santa Barbara Civ. 26740 · 1963-05-20