Opinion

Whiting Finance Co. v. Hopkins

  • 199 Cal. 428
  • 249 P. 853
  • 1926 Cal. LEXIS 290
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Sep 30, 1926
Status
Published
Author
Curtis
On the bench
Curtis, Richards
Cited by
14 cases

The opinion

*437

CURTIS, J., Concurring.

I dissent from the foregoing opinion in so far as it is held therein that the conditional sales contracts were properly assessed as solvent credits and that the owner thereof is required to pay taxes thereon in addition to the taxes paid on the motor vehicles covered by the contracts. By the contract the title to the motor vehicle remained in the seller and he is by law liable for the taxes assessed against it. To require him also to pay a tax upon the amount remaining due on the agreed purchase price thereof would be to exact of him a double tax which finds no warrant in the law. The fact that in the contracts involved herein between the sellers and purchasers of the motor vehicles the latter have agreed to pay taxes assessed against said motor vehicles can have no bearing upon the legality of the tax involved herein. Presumably, the purchasers have received an adequate consideration for their agreement to pay said taxes, either in the price paid for the property or in the terms of the agreement of purchase. That is purely a personal matter between the parties to the contract and. cannot in any way affect the validity of the tax imposed upon the balance due under the contract.

In all other respects I concur in the opinion written by Mr. Justice Richards.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.