Prang v. Assessment Appeals Bd. No. 6, B342735

Background

The Assessor appealed from denial of mandamus challenging the Board’s 2023 decision about the Property’s assessed value and the binding effect of a 2010 stipulation-approved value. 1
Believers, LLC bought the Property in April 2007 for $3.7 million and later transferred it to the Owners in November 2007 by grant deed. 2
At a 2010 Board hearing, the Assessor’s representative stipulated to a $3.774 million base year value, and the Board approved that value. 3
In 2012, the Assessor reversed course and redetermined that the November 2007 transfer was not a change of ownership, then reassessed the Property to $7,760,343. 4
The Owners sought Board correction of the 2012 redetermination, and the Board in 2023 held its 2010 decision remained binding and ordered re-enrollment of $3.774 million. 5
The trial court dismissed the administrative mandate claim as untimely, denied traditional mandamus on the merits, and entered judgment for the Owners. 6

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was administrative mandamus time-barred under section 1094.6? 7	Prang argued section 1094.6 did not apply because the Board decision was not within subdivision (e).	The Owners argued the petition was filed more than 90 days after final decision.	No; section 1094.6 did not apply, so the claim was timely under section 1615. 8
Was the demurrer to the administrative mandate claim prejudicial error? 9	Prang argued dismissal wrongly prevented merits review and possible relief.	The Owners argued any error was harmless.	Yes; reversal and remand for trial on the administrative mandate claim. 10
Did the Board have inherent authority to reconsider a void 2010 decision? 11	Prang argued the Board could set aside its prior decision if it exceeded jurisdiction.	The Owners relied on finality and Rule 326.	Yes; Rule 326 did not eliminate inherent authority to rescind void acts. 12
Did Prang show abuse of discretion on the traditional mandate claim based on extrinsic fraud? 13	Prang argued the Board had to set aside the 2010 decision for extrinsic fraud.	The Owners argued no admissible proof of extrinsic fraud was shown.	No; Prang failed to prove abuse of discretion. 14
Was the 2012 correction exempt from section 51.5’s four-year deadline? 15	Prang argued he corrected only a nonjudgmental change-of-ownership error.	The Owners argued he also tried to undo the 2010 stipulated value.	No; Prang also sought to correct the stipulated value, so the exemption was not shown. 16

Key Cases Cited

William Jefferson & Co., Inc. v. Orange County Assessment Appeals Bd. No. 2, 228 Cal.App.4th 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) (Proposition 13 assessment framework and base-year value rules 17)
Prang v. Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals Bd. No. 2, 54 Cal.App.5th 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020) (reassessment occurs only on specified triggering events 18)
Castillo v. Glenair, Inc., 23 Cal.App.5th 262 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018) (premature notice of appeal may be treated as timely 19)
Meinhardt v. City of Sunnyvale, 16 Cal.5th 643 (Cal. 2024) (appeal deadline runs from judgment entry in administrative mandate cases 20)
Simonelli v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, 240 Cal.App.4th 480 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) (section 1094.6 applies only to decisions fitting subdivision (e)'s definition 21)
Helene Curtis, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals Bds., 121 Cal.App.4th 29 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) (agency generally cannot reopen adjudicative decision absent statutory authority 22)
Aylward v. State Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners, 31 Cal.2d 833 (Cal. 1948) (agency may rescind void acts made beyond its jurisdiction 23)
Mullen v. Department of Real Estate, 204 Cal.App.3d 295 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988) (perjury within the proceeding is intrinsic, not extrinsic, fraud 24)
Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court, 9 Cal.4th 559 (Cal. 1995) (extra-record evidence in traditional mandamus is tightly limited 25)
Sunrise Retirement Villa v. Dear, 58 Cal.App.4th 948 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) (nonjudgmental correction includes mistaken change-of-ownership determinations 26)