Jensen v. Byram

California Court of Appeal Sep 14, 1964 No. Civ. 27161Published

Before: Shinn

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that improvements on land must be separately assessed from the land itself under California law, and failure to do so renders the improvements property that has escaped assessment, subject to delayed assessment under Revenue and Taxation Code section 531.

Issues

Whether improvements on land that were not separately valued on the assessment roll constitute property that has escaped assessment.
Whether an assessor is required to separately assess land and improvements under the California Constitution and Revenue and Taxation Code.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Section 2 of article XIII of the California Constitution requires that land and improvements be separately assessed.”

SHINN, P. J.

The County of Los Angeles appeals from a judgment declaring invalid multiple delayed assessments made by the county assessor of improvements on plaintiff’s land in the belief that the improvements had escaped assessment.

Plaintiff owned a lot in Arcadia; in 1951 he built

[652]

a house on the lot and in the years 1952 through 1960 the land was assessed and taxes were paid, hut through oversight, there was no assessment of improvements by placing a value upon them on the assessment roll and none was shown on the tax bills.

As we understand the theory of plaintiff, which was carried into judgment, it is that plaintiff’s improvements were a part of the realty and that the assessment of the land was, therefore, an assessment of the whole, including the improvements. The position of the county is that the assessor was required by law to place a value upon and assess improvements separate from the land itself, that since this was not done the improvements constituted property that had escaped assessment for the years in question, and that the deferred assessments were legally made pursuant to section 531 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. Our conclusion is that the position of the county must be sustained.

Section 2 of article XIII of the California Constitution requires that land and improvements be separately assessed. Defendants correctly say: “The local assessment roll shall list all property within the county which it is the duty of the assessor to assess. (§ 601.) The roll must show the assessment of improvements separately from the assessment of land (§§ 602 and 607) and improvements are assessed by showing their value opposite the description of the parcel of land on which they are located if they are assessed to the same assessee (§ 608).”

It was said in

Citizens’ Federal Sav. & Loan Assn.

City & County of San Francisco,

202 Cal.App.2d 358, 362 [20 Cal.Rptr. 717] : “In this state, all property must be taxed unless an exemption is authorized by the state Constitution or granted by the laws of the United States

Jensen v. Byram

AI Brief

SHINN, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief