Verizon California v. Board of Equalization

Filed 6/1/21 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC., C083537

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 34201100116029CUMCGDS) v.

BOARD OF EQUALIZATION et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, Eugene L. Balonon, Judge. Affirmed.

O’Melveny & Meyers, Luann L. Simmons, Kendall K. Turner and Abby F. Rudzin, pro hac vice, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Kerr & Wagstaffe, Wagstaffe, von Loewenfeldt, Busch & Radwick, Michael von Loewenfeldt and Frank Busch for Defendant and Respondent Board of Equalization.

Brian Wirtz, County Counsel, for Defendant and Respondent County of Placer.

Amy I. Terrible, County Counsel, for Defendant and Respondent County of Tulare.

1

Leroy Smith, County Counsel, and Linda K. Ash, Assistant County Counsel, for Defendant and Respondent County of Ventura.

Jeffrey S. Blanck, County Counsel, and Scott A. Miles, Senior Deputy Counsel for Defendant and Respondent County of Humbolt.

Greenberg Traurig, Colin W. Fraser, C. Stephen Davis and Bradley R. Marsh as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Appellant.

This is an appeal from the trial court’s judgment granting the State Board of Equalization’s (Board) motion for summary adjudication of Verizon California Inc.’s (Verizon) consolidated actions to recover taxes wrongly levied on its California property for the tax years 2008 through 2012. Verizon argues that the Board should have adopted the valuations it proposed in its petitions to the Board to reassess its property. The statutory ground of the actions requires a “dispute” regarding the Board’s assessments of the property. (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 5148, subd. (a).)1 Finding none we shall affirm the judgment. The California Constitution requires that the Board annually assess the fair market value of telephone company property in California. (Cal. Const., art XIII, § 19; §§ 721, 722.) “[T]he value of the assets of a phone company . . . depends on the [statewide] interrelation and operation of the entire property as a unit [the unitary value of the property].” (Verizon California Inc. v. Board of Equalization (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 666, 672.) Taxes based on the assessed values are levied by each county in which the individual properties making up the unitary property are situated. (§ 745.) A taxpayer may petition the Board to reassess its property. If the petition is denied, the taxpayer may file a judicial action to recover taxes wrongly levied on its