Oreña v. Sherman

Decided July 26, 1882

California Supreme Court · decided 1882-07-26

Hatch, J. Action to recover money paid under protest uport-an-alleged void assessment. The complaint alleges: That the Assessor of the said County of Santa Barbara for the fiscal year 1880-1, did list to the plaintiff herein, upon the assessment roll of said county for said year, with other property, solvent credits in amount twenty thousand dollars, and did assess the same for twenty thousand dollars.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1882-07-26

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 1968

4 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Court :

¶1Section 3633 of the Political Code, can not be held to be unconstitutional unless it be inconsistent with some provision of the Constitution, and as we read Section 8 of Article xiii. of the Constitution there is no inconsistency between said section of the Code and the Constitution. As we construe the Constitution, that section of the Code might be enacted now.

¶2We think that the entry on the assessment book opposite the name of appellant, that he had “neglected to return statement as required by Section 3629, Political Code,” sufficient. The law says that the Assessor “must note the refusal on the assessment book,” etc. It seems to us that the entry which he made was the equivalent of that.

¶3Judgment affirmed.