Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization

From Clever Camel Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Plaintiff

Bi-Metallic Investment

Defendant

State Board of Equalization

Facts

Defendant ordered the valuation of all taxable property to be increased by 40%. Plaintiff is a property holder who is claiming that the increase of tax without the opportunity to be heard is a violation of their due process of law.

Discussion

The court says that "where a rule of conduct applies to more than a few people it is impracticable that every one should have a direct voice in its adoption." Further, the constitution does not mandate town hall meetings for all Acts. Often acts are passed that can be ruinous to people and these people do not have the opportunity to be heard. The court differentiates this fact pattern from Londoner because in that case a very small number of person were "exceptionally affected, in each case upon individual grounds".