Page Sovran Bank/Md.; Fairway Spring Co. v. 1212 Sparrow v. Internal Revenue Service 1211 Speaker of Fla. House of Representatives v. De Grandy 1232 State Administrative Bd. of Election Laws; Anne Arundel County Superintendent of penal or correctional institution. See name or title of superintendent. Superior Court of Cal., Riverside County; Kiskila v. 1225,1245 Super Valu Stores, Inc. v. Iowa Dept. of Revenue and Finance 1213 Tarabishi v. McAlester Reg. Health Ctr. Auth. Public Trust Status 1206 Tarabishi v. McAlester Regional Hospital. 1206 Tarrant Cty. Narco. Intelligence & Coord. Unit; Leatherman v. 1203,1243 Taylor v. Duckworth. 1214 United States. See name of other party. U. S. District Court; Hurd v. 763,1244 1231 United Fidelity & Trust Co.; Amwest Surety Ins. Co. v. 1221 1208 U. S. Metroline Services, Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. 1201 US Sprint Communications Co.; Richman Bros. Records, Inc. v. 1230 William Wrigley, Jr., Co.; Wisconsin Dept. of Revenue v. Wilson; Operating Engineers v. Wisconsin Dept. of Revenue v. William Wrigley, Jr., Co. 214 CASES ADJUDGED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AT OCTOBER TERM, 1991 NORDLINGER v. HAHN, IN HIS CAPACITY AS TAX ASSESSOR FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT No. 90-1912. Argued February 25, 1992-Decided June 18, 1992 In response to rapidly rising real property taxes, California voters approved a statewide ballot initiative, Proposition 13, which added Article XIIIA to the State Constitution. Among other things, Article XIIIA embodies an "acquisition value" system of taxation, whereby property is reassessed up to current appraised value upon new construction or a change in ownership. Exemptions from this reassessment provision exist for two types of transfers: exchanges of principal residences by persons over the age of 55 and transfers between parents and children. Over time, the acquisition-value system has created dramatic disparities in the taxes paid by persons owning similar pieces of property. Longer term owners pay lower taxes reflecting historic property values, while newer owners pay higher taxes reflecting more recent values. Faced with such a disparity, petitioner, a former Los Angeles apartment renter who had recently purchased a house in Los Angeles County, filed suit against respondents, the county and its tax assessor, claiming that Article XIIIA's reassessment scheme violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The County Superior Court dismissed the complaint without leave to amend, and the State Court of Appeal affirmed. Held: Article XIIIA's acquisition-value assessment scheme does not violate the Equal Protection Clause. Pp. 10-18. 1 |