Everett Water Co. v. T. C. Fleming

Citations

• 26 Wash. 364
• 67 P. 82
• 1901 Wash. LEXIS 656

Syllabus

<p>TAXATION ■ — ■ EQUALIZATION — NOTICE SERVICE BY MAIL TIME.</p> <p>Where the notice required by Bal. Code, § 1714. to be given a property owner of a proposed increase by the boall-d of equalization in his assessment is sent by mail, such notice is governed by Id., § 4891, which provides that in case of the service of notice by mail the time of service shall be double thatl required in a case of personal service. (Lewis v. Bishop, 19 Wash. 312, affirmed.)</p> <p>SAME-INSUFFICIENCY OF SERVICE.</p> <p>Under Bal. Code, § 1714, subd. 3, which authorizes the board of equalization to raise an assessment “after at least five days’. notice shall have been given in writing to the ownér or agent” of the property to be affected, a notice • requiring| the property owner to appear before the board “within five days from the date of this notice” is insufficient. ¡</p> <p>SAME.</p> <p>The fact that the board of equalization does not act upon a property owner’s assessment until more than fijve days have elapsed after notice'to him would not cure the service of inadequate notice upon him, since the statute contemplates a notice to the property owner with a date certain, fixed for his appearance more than five days after the service of the notice.</p>