GEORGIEV

I concur in the judgment. I write separately because I do not join in the admittedly unnecessary analysis attempting to construe the meaning of the language of Revenue and Taxation Code section 75.12 defining the date of completion. I join the opinion in all other respects.

A petition for a rehearing was denied July 11, 2007.

MIHARA, Acting P.J.

Appellant Peter Georgiev filed an action against respondent County of Santa Clara (the County) seeking a refund of property taxes on his residence. He claimed that the Santa Clara County Assessment Appeals Board (AAB) abused its discretion in finding that the second-story addition to his residence was 100 percent complete on December 31, 1996, rather than being 100 percent complete in July 1995, when the building inspector gave a "final o.k." to the addition. The superior court granted the County's summary judgment motion on the grounds that Georgiev could not establish that the AAB abused its discretion and Georgiev's contentions were barred by judicial estoppel. We affirm the judgment.

In December 1993, Georgiev obtained a permit and began construction of a secondstory addition to his then 1,356-square-foot residence in San Jose. In July 1995, the City of San Jose building department gave its "final o.k." to Georgiev's secondstory addition. The second-story addition increased the size of the residence to 3,176 square feet.

Georgiev's property was assessed at a value of $149,204 as of the March 1, 1995 "lien date." [1] In October 1995, Georgiev filed a…

*1431 Opinion

Appellant Peter Georgiev filed an action against respondent County of Santa Clara (the County) seeking a refund of property taxes on his residence. He claimed that the Santa Clara County Assessment Appeals Board (AAB) abused its discretion in finding that the second story addition to his residence was 100 percent complete on December 31, 1996, rather than being 100 percent complete in July 1995, when the building inspector gave a “final o.k.” to the addition. The superior court granted the County’s summary judgment motion on the grounds that Georgiev could not establish that the AAB abused its discretion and Georgiev’s contentions were barred by judicial estoppel. We affirm the judgment.

I. Background

In December 1993, Georgiev obtained a permit and began construction of a second-story addition to his then 1,356-square-foot residence in San Jose. In July 1995, the City of San Jose building department gave its “final o.k.” to Georgiev’s second-story addition. The second-story addition increased the size of the residence to 3,176 square feet..

Georgiev’s property was assessed at a value of $149,204 as of the March 1, 1995 “lien date.” 1 In October 1995, Georgiev…