County of Los Angeles v. Ballerino

Citations

• 99 Cal. 593
• 34 P. 329
• 1893 Cal. LEXIS 720

Syllabus

<p>Action fob Taxes—Pabties — Suit by County—Omission of State Taxes The act of April 23, 1880 (Stats. 1880, p. 136), authorizing the bringing of suits to recover delinquent taxes, gives a county the right to maintain an action in its own name for delinquent taxes levied for county purposes; and the fact that it might also have sued in the same action (for delinquent state taxes, is immaterial, where it does not appear that any other action for the state taxes is pending or has been prosecuted to judgment.</p> <p>Id. —Liability Cheated by Statute —Limitation of Action. —An action to recover delinquent taxes is not an action “ upon a contract, obligation, or liability, not founded upon an instrument in writing,” mentioned in section 339 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which must be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues, but is one which arises upon a liability created by statute, other than a penalty or forfeiture, and is barred by the three years’ limitation contained in section 338 of the same code.</p> <p>Id. — Peboentage not a Penalty ok Fobfeitube. — The five per cent upon the amount of a delinquent tax, which under section 3770 of the Political Code the tax collector is directed to collect in addition to the delinquent tax, is not such a penalty or forfeiture as is excepted from the operation of section 338 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which prescribes a three years’ limitation for the bringing of actions, “ upon a liability created by statute other than a penalty or forfeiture,” or as falls within the provisions of section 340 of the same code, requiring an action upon a statute for a penalty or forfeiture to be brought within one year after the cause of action accrues.</p> <p>Id.—Defense of Ebaudulent and Exobbitant Assessment—Tendee of Just Tax—Pleading—Evidence. —An answer in an action to recover a delinquent tax, which seeks to defend against the collection of the tax upon the ground that the assessment was fraudulently and corruptl