Oreña v. Sherman
California Supreme Court
Oreña v. Sherman, 61 Cal. 101 (Cal. 1882)
1882 Cal. LEXIS 549
Oreña v. Sherman
Opinion of the Court
Section 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.
We 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.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- GASPAR OREÑA v. C. E. SHERMAN, Sheriff, etc.
- Cited By
- 4 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Assessment—Statement—Equalization—Constitutional Law.—Section 3633 of the Pol. Code, providing that if any person after demand made by the Assessor neglects or refuses to give under oath the statement provided for in § 3629 Pol. C. etc. the Assessor must note the refusal on the assessment book opposite his name and must make an estimate of the value of the property of such person, and that the value so fixed by the Assessor must not be reduced by the Board of Supervisors, is not unconstitutional. Id.—Id.—An entry on the assessment book opposite the name-of the party assessed that he had “neglected to return a statement as required by § 3629 Pol. C.” is sufficient.