Grotefend v. Ultz
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- Wright v. Fox (Cal. 1907)
- Lewis v. Blackburn (Or. 1902)
- Houser & Haines Manufacturing Co. v. Hargrove (Cal. 1900)
- Z. Russ & Sons Co. v. Crichton (Cal. 1897)
- Gwynn v. Dierssen (Cal. 1894)
- City of San Luis Obispo v. Pettit (Cal. 1891)
- Jatunn v. O'Brien (Cal. 1891)
- Greenwood v. Adams (Cal. 1889)
- Brady v. Dowden (Cal. 1881)
- Grimm v. O'Connell (Cal. 1880)
- Hearst v. Egglestone (Cal. 1880)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The Political Code declares (sec. 3628): “ The Assessor must ascertain the names of all taxable persons and all property in his county subject to taxation,” and requires (sec. 3650) that officer to prepare an assessment book, in which must be specified, “ in separate columns, under the appropriate heading, first the name of the person to whom the property is assessed. * * * * By secs. 3635 and 3636 it is provided that “if the owner or claimant of any property is unknown,” the property must be assessed “ to unknown owners.”
The first duty of the Assessor under these provisions is to ascertain the name of the owner of each piece or parcel of
Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial. Remittitur forthwith.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.