50 Cal.App.4th 1597, C021645, Scott v. State Bd. of Equalization

Citation: 50 Cal.App.4th 1597, 58 Cal.Rptr.2d 376

Opinion Judge: [10] The opinion of the court was delivered by: Raye

Party Name: Scott v. State Bd. of Equalization

Attorney: [7] Kevin H. Booty, Jr., County Counsel, and Richard Karlsson, Assistant County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Appellant. [8] Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Lawrence K. Keethe and Robert D. Milam, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Respondent.

Case Date: November 22, 1996

Court: California Court of Appeals

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

50 Cal.App.4th 1597, C021645, Scott v. State Bd. of Equalization

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

California - 50 Cal.3d 402, S008824, Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. City of Los Angeles
California - 107 Cal.App.3d 731, 21536, California Computer Products, Inc. v. County of Orange
California - 129 Cal.App.3d 287, 61600, Atlantic Richfield Co. v. County of Los Angeles
California - 195 Cal.App.3d 982, A034522, County of Sonoma v. State Bd. of Equalization
California - 200 Cal.App.3d 828, C002272, Copren v. State Bd. of Equalization

See all quotations