Munkdale

Munkdale v. Giannini

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 552·35 Cal. App. 4th 1104·41 Cal. Rptr. 2d 805·95 Daily Journal DAR 7848·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4594
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 15, 1995A060619California3,986 words

Opinion

Opinion

Phelan, J.

Appellants Steve and Sharon Munkdale seek review of a judgment by which the San Mateo Superior Court denied their claim for a refund of property taxes paid. The trial court found that the respondents, County of San Mateo and its assessor, Roland Giannini, had properly reassessed 100 percent of certain parcels of real estate upon transfer of those properties from a partnership of which appellants were partners, to appellants as individuals, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 61, subdivision (i).

On appeal, the Munkdales contend that the conveyances did not involve a transfer of “beneficial use” and, thus, did not constitute a “change in ownership” of the properties within the meaning of the California Constitution, article XIII A, section 1, subdivision (a) (Proposition 13), and Revenue and Taxation Code section 60 et seq. They also raise an equal protection challenge to the reassessment, contending that the Legislature acted arbitrarily and unreasonably in affording the same tax treatment to transfers between corporations and former shareholders as is afforded transfers between partnerships and former partners. Assuming that there was a “change in ownership”…

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.