Planer

Spring Valley Water Co. v. Planer

Good Law
88 Cal. App. 170·263 P. 323
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 31, 1927Docket No. 5908.California1,256 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Parker, J.

pro tem.—Appeal by defendant from judgment in favor of plaintiff.

This is a proceeding in mandamus. The case involves the validity of certain taxes assessed and also presents the question of the propriety of the remedy sought. The purpose of the action was to compel the tax collector to issue to plaintiff his receipt showing payment in full of current taxes upon the tender of all taxes save and except the district taxes discussed in Spring Valley Water Co. v. County of Alameda, ante, p. 157 [ 263 Pac. 318 ]. The contention of appellant is that this is not a proper exercise of the writ of mandate, and his ground of contention is that to employ the writ in similar cases would tend to endless confusion in the system of tax collections, and that plaintiff has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy under the general law. However, it is the law that the writ of mandate will issue to compel the performance of a plain duty, and it is obvious that when a legal tender within the time specified by statute, of an amount sufficient to discharge the tax claim is made to the tax collector it is his duty to issue the usual receipt, and mandate lies to compel the performance of this duty (Perry v.…

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.