Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta City of Sacramento v. Hickman 66 Cal. 2d 1010

← Cases

City of Sacramento v. Hickman

66 Cal. 2d 1010 Court Cal. Decision date 1967-06-15 Docket Sac. No. 7804 English

Delivered by MOSK, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 1010
59 Cal.Rptr. 618 ,
428 P.2d 602 ]
[Sac. No. 7804.
In Bank.
June 15, 1967.]
CITY OF SACRAMENTO, Petitioner, v. IRENE HICKMAN, as Assessor, etc., Respondent.
Joseph E. Coomes, Jr., City Attorney, James P. Jackson, Assistant City Attorney and Felix S. Wahrhaftig for Petitioner.
Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General, Ernest P. Goodman, Assistant Attorney General, Edward P. Hollingshead and Philip W. Marking, Deputy Attorneys General, as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.
Desmond, Miller & Desmond, Bill W. West, Carol Miller, Wilkins & Mix and Brian D. Flynn for Respondent.

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent county assessor to comply with Revenue and Taxation Code section 401. Pursuant to a 1965 agreement between the County of Sacramento and petitioner, the latter transferred to respondent the duty to assess all taxable property within its boundaries. (Gov. Code, § 51500 et seq.)

The sole issue is the constitutionality of section 401. The identical question was presented in County of Sacramento v. Hickman (1967) ante, p. 593 [ 59 Cal.Rptr. 609 , 428 P.2d 593 ], this day filed. For the reasons set forth in that opinion, we hold section 401 to be valid.

The demurrer is overruled. Let a peremptory writ issue as prayed. This order is final forthwith.

Traynor, C. J., McComb, J., Peters, J., Tobriner, J., Burke, J., and Sullivan, J., concurred.

Statutes and regulations cited