Appellate Experience

The appellate experience of the Cahill ∙ Davis & O’Neall property tax lawyers is unparalleled.

• AES Alamitos, LLC v. County of Los Angeles (2006)2006 WL 1216795 (unpublished) (Appellate Court agreed with taxpayer that prior valuation by Superior Court was binding on County for property tax purposes) (Cris K. O'Neall)
  
  
• American Sheds, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 384 (Contended that various intangible assets and rights associated with regional landfill were excluded from property taxation) (Cris K. O'Neall)
  
  
• Auerbach v. County of Los Angeles Assessment Appeals Bd. No. 5 (2003) 2003 Cal.App.Unpub. Lexis 6036 (Assessment Appeals Board has discretion under Property Tax Rule 305 to allow amendment of applications for changed assessment) (John D. Cahill)
  
  
• Auerbach v. Assessment Appeals Bd. No. 1 for County of Los Angeles (2006) 39 Cal.4th 153 (Held that tenant-owned improvements were subject to reassessment if lessor of underlying land transfers their interest so long as the remaining term of the ground lease is less than 35 years) (Cris K. O'Neall)
  
  
• County of Los Angeles v. Sasaki (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1442 (Affirm state legislature's authority to reallocate property tax revenue from local governments and special districts to school districts in the face of a challenge that the reallocation violates home rule provisions of the California Constitution, and holding that a county may not legislate in the area of property tax allocation because the state government has occupied the field) (John D. Cahill)
  
  
• County of Los Angeles v. Southern California Edison (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 1108 (Appellate Court upheld favorable Superior Court decision valuing power plants and confirmed that intangible assets were properly excluded from documentary transfer tax assessment) (Cris K. O'Neall)
  
  
• Exxon Mobil Corporation v. County of Santa Barbara (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 1347 (Assessment Appeals Board erred in not treating an onshore oil processing facility and offshore oil field as an integrated appraisal unit and in using the cost approach to value the onshore facility.) ("The valuation methodology adopted by the Board 'wholly abandons any attempt to achieve a reasonable estimate of the true present value of the property to which it addresses itself…") (C. Stephen Davis)
  
  
• Independent Energy Producers Assn. v. State Board of Equalization (2004) 125 Cal.App.4th 425 (Independent power generators meet "dedication" test under California Constitution for assessment by State Board of Equalization) (C. Stephen Davis)
  
  
• Maples v. Kern County Assessment Appeals Board (Occidental of Elk Hills, Inc.) (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 172 (Represented oil and gas exploration company in dispute involving whether unproved oil and gas reserves acquired in a closed auction are subject to property taxation under California law) (Cris K. O'Neall)
  
  
• May Department Stores Co. v. County of Los Angeles (1987) 196 Cal.App. 3d 755 (Holding that items such as price tags, sales receipts, gift boxes, wrapping paper and twine qualify as tax exempt inventory; assessor need not consider investment tax credit in valuing used property; in valuing equipment, method used by assessor and adopted by the board must be upheld if it is reasonable, despite the fact that another method might have been better) (John D. Cahill)
  
  
• Montgomery Ward v. County of Santa Clara (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 1122 (Assessor permitted to correct base year value on a reported change in ownership more than four years after the change in ownership) (C. Stephen Davis)
  
  
• Morse Signal Devices of California, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles (1984) 161 Cal.App.3d 570 (Company which contractually retains complete ownership and control of central components of a burglar alarm system installed in a subscriber's home is taxable on the entire system even though some minor on-site components are owned by the subscriber) (John D. Cahill)
  
  
• Phillips Petroleum Corporation v. County of Lake (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 180 (Base year value for geothermal mineral interests determined on acquisition of proved reserves) (C. Stephen Davis)
  
  
• TRW v. County of Los Angeles (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1703 (Asserted that low-value and expensed U.S. Government-owned business personal property used in performance of contracts for Government was immune from property taxation) (Cris K. O'Neall)
  
  
• Watson Co-Generation Company v. County of Los Angeles (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 1066 (As amicus for Independent Energy Producers Association.) (Assessor properly implemented the income approach using actual income levied from an above-market power sales agreement, rather than imputed market income) (C. Stephen Davis)

State Board of Equalization Experience

Cahill ∙ Davis & O’Neall's property tax lawyers have maintained a long, responsible working relationship with the California State Board of Equalization. The Cahill ∙ Davis & O’Neall lawyers have, by way of example, participated in the following rulemaking or advisory projects at the State Board of Equalization.

• Represented members of the oil and gas industry in the development of Assessors' Handbook section 566, the Assessment of Oil and Gas Properties
  
  
• Represented members of the geothermal industry in the development of SBE Rule 473 (18 Code Cal.Regs. § 413)
  
  
• Represented independent power generators in connection with SBE Rule 905 and Amended Rule 905 (18 Code Cal.Regs. § 905) (Assessment Jurisdiction for Independent Generators)
  
  
• Represented billboard owners with respect to appraisal guidelines for outdoor signs, Letter to Assessors No. 2002/078
  
  
• Revisions of Rules of Practice pertaining to hearings before county assessment appeals boards (SBE 300 Rules Series, 18 Code Cal.Regs. §§ 300 et. seq.)
  
  
• Revision of SBE Assessors' Handbooks, including Basic Appraisal(AH § 501), Advanced Appraisal (AH § 502), Assessment Appeal Manual and Assessment of Possessory Interest (AH § 501)
  
  
• SBE Annotation 720.0009 (When an Assessment Appeals Board has rendered a decision establishing the base year value for a property, the assessed values on the roll for subsequent years must be conformed with the board's determination)