Swicegood

Swicegood v. Rush

Good Law
178 Cal. App. 3d 119·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 2640·223 Cal. Rptr. 627
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 1986A018026California4,484 words

Opinion

Opinion

Anderson, J.

This is an appeal from summary judgment granted in favor of respondents.

The parties to the action are plaintiffs Joseph Swicegood, the former principal appraiser of Contra Costa County, taxpayers R. Lyle Van Norman and Barbara Jean Orcutt, individually (hereafter appellants), and defendants Carl S. Rush, Assessor, Donald L. Bouchet, Auditor-Controller and Alfred O. Lomeli, Treasurer of Contra Costa County (hereafter respondents). This litigation involves yet another Proposition 13 dispute and concerns the determination of the correct tax base of residential properties in Contra Costa County.

In the early 1970’s Contra Costa County engaged in a cyclical reappraisal of residential properties. Under this program one-fourth of all the residential property was revalued each year using the traditional periodic appraisal (physical on-site inspection) method prescribed by Revenue and Taxation Code section 405.5 together with a sophisticated computer-assisted appraisal program (CAAP). The latter was based upon a multiple regression principle and was regarded as equivalent to the section 405.5 physical assessment technique. Pursuant to this cyclical assessment procedure in 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.