Taxation: Revenue And Taxation Code Fee-Shifting Provision Did Not Allow For Fee Shifting Against Assessor Action Where There Was Simply A Misapplication Of Law

Subjective, Cognitive Decision By Assessor That Provision, Rule, Or Regulation Was Unconstitutional/Invalid Was Not Shown To Allow For Fee Shifting.

The Fountain of Taxation.  1909.  Library of Congress.

            The next case, Land Partners, LLC v. County of Orange, Case No. G053664 (4^th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 10, 2018) (unpublished), involves a fee-shifting statute, Revenue and Taxation Code section 5152, which allows the trial judge discretion to award fees against a county assessor in a section 5152 taxpayer refund action where (1) the court must have allowed recovery of taxes; (2) the court must have found the void assessment, or portion thereof, was made in violation of a specific provision of the state constitution/property tax statutes/SBE rule or regulation; and (3) the court must find the assessor subjectively believed a specific provision of the (2) items was unconstitutional or invalid, and assessed property contrary thereto, but the assessor failed to bring the requisite declaratory relief action.

            Taxpayer moved for recovery of section 5152 fees after winning all of the elements but the subjective mindset of the assessor.  Both the trial and appellate courts found that this was fatal so as to justify the lower court’s denial of fees to taxpayer.  What the record did show was that the assessor just applied the law wrongly, which did not the satisfy the subjective mindset element. 

            Justice Ikola authored the 3-0 panel opinion in affirming the fee denial decision below.