From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

City of Sacramento v. Hickman

Supreme Court of California
Jun 15, 1967
66 Cal.2d 1010 (Cal. 1967)

Opinion

Docket No. Sac. 7804.

June 15, 1967.

PROCEEDING in mandamus to compel a county assessor to comply with Rev. Tax. Code, § 401 Peremptory writ granted.

Joseph E. Coomes, Jr., City Attorney, James P. Jackson, Assistant City Attorney and Felix S. Wahrhaftig for Petitioner.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General, Ernest P. Goodman, Assistant Attorney General, Edward P. Hollingshead and Philip W. Marking, Deputy Attorneys General, as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.

Desmond, Miller Desmond, Bill W. West, Carol Miller, Wilkins Mix and Brian D. Flynn for Respondent.


Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent county assessor to comply with Revenue and Taxation Code section 401 Pursuant to a 1965 agreement between the County of Sacramento and petitioner, the latter transferred to respondent the duty to assess all taxable property within its boundaries. (Gov. Code, § 51500 et seq.)

The sole issue is the constitutionality of section 401 The identical question was presented in County of Sacramento v. Hickman (1967) ante, p. 593 [ 59 Cal.Rptr. 609, 428 P.2d 593], this day filed. For the reasons set forth in that opinion, we hold section 401 to be valid.

The demurrer is overruled. Let a peremptory writ issue as prayed. This order is final forthwith.

Traynor, C.J., McComb, J., Peters, J., Tobriner, J., Burke, J., and Sullivan, J., concurred.


Summaries of

City of Sacramento v. Hickman

Supreme Court of California
Jun 15, 1967
66 Cal.2d 1010 (Cal. 1967)
Case details for

City of Sacramento v. Hickman

Case Details

Full title:CITY OF SACRAMENTO, Petitioner, v. IRENE HICKMAN, as Assessor, etc.…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jun 15, 1967

Citations

66 Cal.2d 1010 (Cal. 1967)
59 Cal. Rptr. 618
428 P.2d 602