Owens

Owens v. County of Los Angeles

Good Law
162 Cal. Rptr. 3d 769·220 Cal. App. 4th 107
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 2, 2013B242291, B242393California9,025 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kitching, J.

INTRODUCTION

In this opinion we adjudicate two appeals challenging a utility user tax (UUT) enacted pursuant to a measure approved by the voters. Appellants contend the UUT is unlawful because it violated the voters’ due process and free speech rights and because the tax was imposed in violation of Proposition 218 and the Elections Code. We publish this case to address these important substantive legal issues and to provide an example of when the doctrine of judicial estoppel should apply.

The present appeals arise from two separate superior court class actions against defendant and respondent County of Los Angeles (County): the first by plaintiff and appellant Larry Pitts and the second by plaintiffs and appellants Patrick Owens and Patricia Munoz. Pitts appeals an order denying his motion to enforce a settlement and Owens and Munoz appeal a judgment. We affirm the order and the judgment.

In both appeals appellants challenge the legality of the County’s UUT enacted pursuant to a measure approved by the voters on November 4, 2008 (Measure U). We reject all of appellants’ arguments on the merits.

We also conclude that Pitts is judicially estopped and barred by the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.