Schoenberg v. County of Los Angeles, No. B211754

In plaintiff's action against the county to reduce the tax assessment on his residential property, dismissal of the action is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's claim that the Appeals Board failed to asses land and improvements separately is without factual foundation; 2) plaintiff had no authority to limit the jurisdiction of the Appeals Board to a reassessment of only the value of the land; 3) the Appeals Board was permitted on its own initiative to reassess the value of the improvements on the land; 4) a total reappraisal was necessary to fulfill the Appeals Board's mandate to equalize property values; and 5) plaintiff's exclusive remedy was not a petition for a writ of mandate against the Appeals Board, but rather a complaint seeking a refund of taxes, a remedy plaintiff belatedly pursued against the county after it was barred by the statute of limitations.     

Read Schoenberg v. County of Los Angeles, No. B211754 [HTML]

Read Schoenberg v. County of Los Angeles, No. B211754 [PDF]

Appellate Information

Filed December 3, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Boren

Counsel
For Appellant:   Burris, Schoenberg & Walden and E. Randol Schoenberg, in pro. per

For Appellee:  Robert E. Kalunian, Acting County Counsel, Albert Ramseyer, Principal Deputy County Counsel