Laserfiche WebLink
I omitted. ) " (Aries Dev. Co. , supra, 48 Ca1.App. 3d at p. 541 . ) <br /> 2 The Stipulated Judgment purports to grant defendants a <br /> 3 final adjudication of any tax owed for the disposal of materials <br /> 4 ( alleged in the complaint. This clearly conflicts with the <br /> 5 Board's duties to determine if the taxpayer has properly paid its <br /> 6 ( taxes, and if not, to assess additional taxes and if applicable, <br /> pp able, <br /> 7 penalties . There can be no doubt that the Board' s statutory <br /> 8 duties are "injuriously affected" by the Stipulated Judgment. <br /> 9 lConsequently, the Board has the right to bring this action to <br /> 10 vacate the judgment. <br /> 11 CONCLUSION <br /> 12 The Stipulated Settlement must be vacated because it <br /> 13 , purports to prevent the Board of Equalization from carrying out <br /> 14 its statutorily mandated duty of determining if the proper amount <br /> 15 of taxes have been paid pursuant to the Hazardous Waste Control <br /> 16 Act. To the extent the Stipulated Settlement purports to be a <br /> 17 full and final adjudication of the tax liability of Defendants, <br /> 18 it should be set vacated. <br /> 19 DATED: August 9 1993 <br /> 20 DANIEL E. LUNGREN, Attorney General <br /> of the State of California <br /> 21 LAWRENCE K. KEETHE, Supervising <br /> 22 Deputy Attorney General <br /> 23 <br /> 24 MICHAEL ORNEZ <br /> Deputy A orney General <br /> 25 <br /> MJC:as <br /> 26 SA93CV0291 <br /> 27 <br /> 10 . <br /> T <br />