This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Probate and Trusts
Real Property
Writ of Mandate

The Estate of Margie Sonnier

Published: May 2, 2015 | Result Date: Mar. 24, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: PES-08-290936 Settlement –  $52,500

Court

San Francisco Superior


Attorneys

Petitioner

Nancy D. Rasch

John E. Boessenecker


Respondent

Carole F. Ruwart

Dennis J. Herrera
(San Francisco Public Utilities Commission)

Aileen M. McGrath

Julie K. Van Nostern
(Office of the City Attorney)


Facts

Rena Harel, administrator of the Estate of Margie Sonnier, deceased, filed for a petition and writ relating to taxes assessed against the Estate.

The decedent owned two real properties at the time of her death that she had inherited from her late mother who passed away in 1994.

Contentions

PETITIONER'S CONTENTIONS:
The petitioner contended that the San Francisco County Tax Assessor wrongly assessed real property taxes against the Estate. The Assessor rejected her claim for a reassessment exclusion for transfer between parent and child based on Harel's omission of Sonnier's mother's social security number on the claim form. The Assessor reassessed the real property by way of escape tax assessments. Petitioner paid the additional tax assessments. The Estate later provided the social security number but the appeal was rejected by the Assessment Appeals Board as untimely. Harel filed a Petition for Order Directing Transfer and Conveyance of Real Property and for a Writ of Mandate.

RESPONDENT'S CONTENTIONS:
The Assessor argued that Harel failed to comply with the requirements for presenting a claim for exclusion and that even if the denial of the exclusion was incorrect, Harel was still not entitled to a refund of the taxes because the challenge was untimely.

Result

The parties settled for $52,500.


#119844

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390