Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P. v. Board of Equalization

Good Law
189 Cal. Rptr. 3d 673·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 617·238 Cal. App. 4th 871
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 16, 2015No. A140540California5,034 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Humes, J.

Appellants Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P., Sprint Spectrum L.P., Wirelessco, L.P., Nextel of California, Inc., and Nextel Boost of California, LLC (collectively referred to as Sprint or the company), filed this action seeking a refund on taxes they paid on property assessed by respondent Board of Equalization (the Board). The Legislature has mandated that for a telephone company to file such a judicial tax-refund action it must first file a petition for reassessment with the Board stating “in the petition [that] it is intended to . . . serve [as a claim for refund].” (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 5148, subd. (f); see id., subd. (g)(1).) 1 Sprint filed a petition for reassessment but did not state in it that the petition was also intended to serve as a claim for refund. Relying on the plain language of the statute, the trial court granted summary judgment in die Board’s favor. We affirm. Although requiring a telephone company to state in its reassessment petition that it is claiming a refund as a prerequisite for filing a judicial tax-refund action serves limited practical purposes, the requirement is plain and compulsory.

I.

Factual and Procedural Background

A. The Statutory…

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.