Law Firm News
Today's Legal News/b> Bookmark This Website
State Supreme Court rules on illegal taxes
Lawyer News Press | 2011/08/01 09:06
The state Supreme Court made it easier this week for California taxpayers to seek refunds from cities and counties, ruling that a claim of an illegal local tax can be pursued as a class action on behalf of everyone who was overcharged.

The unanimous decision Monday in a Los Angeles case overturned lower-court rulings requiring local taxpayers to file individual refund claims.

In a class action, a representative can win damages that are distributed to an entire group of people affected by the same unlawful action. Class-action status often determines whether a tax can be effectively challenged, said Paul Heidenreich, a lawyer for consumer organizations in the case.

When only one person can sue at a time, there's little incentive to do so with small amounts at stake, he said.

The ruling may not affect San Francisco, however. Deputy City Attorney Peter Keith said the city has ordinances that set rules for tax refund claims and prohibit class actions. He said the court allowed class-wide suits only when a city or county has no laws of its own regulating tax refunds.

Francis Gregorek, lawyer for the plaintiff in the Los Angeles case, said a future ruling may be needed to determine whether a city can shield itself from class actions.

Class actions have become a hotly contested legal battleground. The U.S. Supreme Court restricted their use in two California cases earlier this year, refusing to allow as many as 1.5 million women to sue Wal-Mart Stores Inc. as a group over pay and promotion practices, and rejecting class-wide arbitration of a cell phone customer's overcharge claim against ATamp;T.

Gregorek's client, Estuardo Ardon, sued Los Angeles in 2006, claiming that a city telephone tax was illegal because it was linked to a federal excise tax that had been ruled invalid. Gregorek said the suit seeks millions of dollars in refunds for all phone customers in the city and has led to challenges against similar taxes in other communities.

The case has remained on hold while state courts determined whether Ardon can represent other customers. An appellate court said he could sue only as an individual, citing the state Supreme Court's 1992 ruling that rejected class-action status for a challenge to the state's taxes on vehicles bought by Californians in other states.


[PREV] [1] ..[1928][1929][1930][1931][1932][1933][1934][1935][1936].. [2411] [NEXT]
All
Lawyer News Press
Attorney Press Release
Law Firm Information
Legal Court Feed
Lawyer News Source
Current Legal Issues
Attorney Blogs
Recent Law Insight
Updated Court News
Judge blocks plan to allow i..
Getty Images and Stability A..
Supreme Court makes it easie..
Trump formally asks Congress..
World financial markets welc..
Cuban exiles were shielded f..
Arizona prosecutors ordered ..
What to know about the Supre..
Trump Seeks Supreme Court Ap..
Budget airline begins deport..
Jury begins deliberating in ..
Judge bars deportations of V..
Judge to weigh Louisiana AG..
Judge blocks parts of Trump..
Judge bars Trump from denyin..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
   Law Firm Blog Links
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
San Francisco Family Law Lawyer
San Jose Family Law Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
 
 
© www.lawfirmseo101.com. All rights reserved.

The legal content posted on this web site has been prepared by Law Firm Seo as a service to the legal news community and is not intended to replace legal advice or substitute for professional legal consultation with a licensed lawyer or attorney in any particular case or circumstance. Law Firm SEO postings and comments are available for legal educational purposes only and should not be used to analyze any specific legal situation.

Personal Injury Lawyer Web Design