Franchise Tax

Useful Resources for Franchise Tax

Recent Rulings on Franchise Tax

76-100 of 1778 results

RE: FIRST AND FNL RPT ON WVR OF ACCT, FOR COMPENSATION, FINAL DIST

Claim by Franchise Tax Board was filed 2-26-18 for $250.24. Statement at ¶ 10 is incorrect. PrC § 10900; CRC § 7.403 3. Proposed Order HEIDI REDITA JOEL A. HARRIS JAIME E. REDITA PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE -- See also Line # 4 – Need: 1. Appearances to report status 2. Original signature on verification or verified declaration to attach a corrected face page in compliance with LR 2.80 et seq. and CRC § 2.300 et seq. regarding facsimile filing. 3.

  • Hearing

    Oct 06, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

ESTATE OF GARBIS SARKISSIAN VS PATRICIA SLESINGER BENTSON ET

The suspension of Hoops Nuts, LLC by the Franchise Tax Board does not demonstrate a lack of access to witnesses. Any inability to conduct discovery may be raised by way of a discovery motion. Indeed, the fact that DCDC has a written release of liability regarding personal property against DCDC Holdings (Suppl. Decl. of Patrick C. McGarrigle, Exh. 5) suggests DCDC has the key piece of evidence it needs to defend this lawsuit on the merits. As such, the motion to quash the service of summons is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Oct 06, 2020

LYDIA HARRIS VS KEVIN GILLIAM

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Wasserman, Comden, & Casselman, LLP OPPOSITION: Plaintiff Lydia Harris Plaintiff Lydia Harris, through her current counsel Dermot Givens have filed several motions attempting to set aside or vacate a $107 million judgment issued in Harris’ favor and against Marion Knight and Death Row Records. In September 2019, ...

  • Hearing

    Oct 05, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

IN THE MATTER OF: WESTERN PROGRESSIVE, LLC

PETITION TO DEPOSIT PROCEEDS IS GRANTED. Background On July 17, 2020, Petitioner Western Progressive, LLC (hereinafter “Western Progressive”) filed the instant petition to deposit undistributed proceeds of trustee’s sale pursuant to Civil Code section 2924j. Legal Standard Civil Code section 2924j provides: If, after due diligen...

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

IN THE MATTER OF: WESTERN PROGRESSIVE, LLC

PETITION TO DEPOSIT PROCEEDS IS GRANTED. Background On July 17, 2020, Petitioner Western Progressive, LLC (hereinafter “Western Progressive”) filed the instant petition to deposit undistributed proceeds of trustee’s sale pursuant to Civil Code section 2924j. Legal Standard Civil Code section 2924j provides: If, after due diligen...

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

JEREMY DANIEL KINTNER VS CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION

“On May 28, 2009, the California Franchise Tax Board suspended HK Architectural’s corporate status. Despite being suspended, HK Architectural continued to do business but did not pay any sales tax.” (Id. at 926.) “In February 2012, the Board of Equalization (the Board) assessed plaintiff for the amount of sales tax that HK Architectural owed but never remitted to the Board for the last three quarters of 2009.” (Id.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

MATTER OF THE JOSEPH LEE REVOCABLE TRUST

Verified declaration by petitioner to show that notice of administration was given to the Franchise Tax Board. PrC § 9202(c)(1) 3. Compliance with CRC 7.250 regarding any acts taken under IAEA w/notice of proposed action. (Specifics needed or statement that no action was taken) 4. Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify account period. Account should begin as of date of death, not 7-11-19 as reported at ¶ 8. 5. Verified declaration of petitioner showing compliance with Probate Code § 11005 6.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

ESTATE OF CZESLAW KENTZER

Declaration addressing creditor claim filed by Franchise Tax Board on 6-15-2020 for $7,385.63. PrC § 10900; CRC § 7.403. 3. Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify loss on sale of 2001 Chevrolet Silverado. Loss is $3,700.00; carry value is $5,100.00, as listed on I&A. 4. Verified declaration by petitioner to show calculation of statutory fee base as required by CRC § 7.705. Specifically, must correct loss on sale as relates to maximum statutory fees allowable. 5.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

THE MORTGAGE LAW FIRM, PLC VS ALL CLAIMANTS TO SURPLUS PROCEEDS AFTER THE TRUSTEE'S SALE OF THE REAL PROPERTY

Franchise Tax Board.

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ESTATE OF JACK P. BLAKEMORE

Nature of Proceedings: Petition for First and Final Report and Final Distribution The following must be submitted: 1) Notice to Franchise Tax Board. Notice MUST have been given to the Franchise Tax Board not later than 90 days after the date letters are first issued. (Prob. Code, § 9202, subd. (c)(1).) The Petition at paragraph 8c does not indicate notice was given. 2) Accounting or Waivers.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

MARINA HABA VS VICINO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ET AL.

Franchise Tax Bd. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 881, 887.) “Moreover, a federal judgment is as final in California courts as it would be in federal courts.” (Id.) As such, the order granting the stipulation, which included the waiver, was on the merits and final. It was also final until modified or set aside by Judge Barash or reversed by an appellate court. As for whether Haba was in privity with her husband, the court finds Haba was in privity with the party to the former proceeding.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

WATZMAN, ET AL. V. ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH TENA, ET AL.

Here, 777 Properties I, LLC is a forfeited entity according to the California Secretary of State and the California Franchise Tax Board. Therefore, it can no longer defend itself in the matter. (Mkryan Decl., ¶ 6; Exh. A.) No party disputes this assertion. The motion sets forth the grounds for intervention. It includes a copy of the proposed answer-in-intervention. (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subds. (c), (d)(1); Mkryan Decl., Exh. B.) Accordingly, the motion is granted.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

GARDEN CITY, INC. V. ERIC SWALLOW, ET AL.

Franchise Tax Bd. (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 247, 257–259 [courts apply California law on res judicata while giving full faith and credit to federal judgments].) Even so, Cross-Defendants do not analyze and establish the preclusive effect in light of the particular allegations, primary rights, and parties here. Their presentation is so imprecise, particularly their vague reference to “those claims” that it is not exactly clear what their theory of preclusion is.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

MATTER OF SUZANNE B. SOULE TRUST

Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify whether notice was needed and/or given to Department of Health Care Services, Victim Compensation Board and Franchise Tax Board 4. Proposed Order KUNIGUND MARIA NEMETH RALPH E NEMETH ANGELO J LAGORIO PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Creditor Claims fully listed in Petition including date filed. PrC § 10900; CRC § 7.403 2.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PETITION OF JANGMU TAMANG

Verified declaration by petitioner to show that notice of administration was given to the Franchise Tax Board. PrC § 9202©(1) 4. Verified declaration by petitioner to provide information requested in PrC §12201(a) 5. Proof of mailing Notice of Hearing with required advisement under PrC §12201(b) 6. Verified declaration to add names and addresses of all parties entitled to notice Notes: 1. At the 1-9-20 hearing, Atty. Hass requested a 3rd party administrator be appointed. 2.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

TAFT VS CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY HEARING ON WRIT OF MANDATE

Franchise Tax Bd. (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 426, 432–433.) The court reviews voter initiatives under the same principles of statutory interpretation that govern statutes passed by the Legislature. (People v. Laird (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 458, 463.) The Fourteenth Amendment provides: “No State shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The California Constitution provides: “A person may not be ... denied equal protection of the laws ....”

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

RICARDO PRADO ET. AL. VS. DARIN STOYTCHEV ET. AL.

The complaint alleged that the property was in a state of disrepair, that the HOA as controlled or governed by Defendants refused to take the necessary action to repair the property, that Defendant Cook took over common areas for private use, that the HOA failed to provide reports to the Franchise Tax Board, that the Defendants refused to allow for a Special Assessment to address any of these issues, that Defendants refused to update the Master Management Documents or amend the Articles of Incorporation.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

  • Judge

    H. Jay Ford

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

AMAG INC, VS MARC ANTHONY CUBAS, ET AL.

In support, AMAG submits a document from the California Secretary of State website reflecting that Vlaze’s corporate charter was forfeited by the Franchise Tax Board as of December 2015. (Killian Decl. Ex. 1.) This claim is also unavailing. Vlaze’s failure to pay franchise taxes before it breached the loan agreement is consistent with becoming insolvent. (See Marc Decl. ¶ 30 (noting that Vlaze faced significant financial struggles in 2008).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JOSEPH GRESSIS VS CORPORATE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

In support, AMAG submits a document from the California Secretary of State website reflecting that Vlaze’s corporate charter was forfeited by the Franchise Tax Board as of December 2015. (Killian Decl. Ex. 1.) This claim is also unavailing. Vlaze’s failure to pay franchise taxes before it breached the loan agreement is consistent with becoming insolvent. (See Marc Decl. ¶ 30 (noting that Vlaze faced significant financial struggles in 2008).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

BLAKESLEE, ET AL. V. DANIEL ANSEL AS CO-ADMINISTRATOR OF ESTATE OF JOSEPH ANTHONY TENA, ET AL.

Here, 777 Properties I, LLC is a forfeited entity according to the California Secretary of State and the California Franchise Tax Board. Therefore, it can no longer defend itself in the matter. (Mkryan Decl., ¶ 6; Exh. A.) No party disputes this assertion. The motion sets forth the grounds for intervention. It includes a copy of the proposed answer-in-intervention. (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subds. (c), (d)(1); Mkryan Decl., Exh. B.) Accordingly, the motion is granted.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

IN THE MATTER OF KATHRYN SUE YATES

This petition was continued several times from 2/19/20 to resolve a potential tax liability owed to the Franchise Tax Board ("FTB"). On 2/20/20, the FTB filed a creditor's claim for $5,520.42 and a request for special notice. What is the status of the claim? As of 9/2/20, no notice of this continued hearing date has been filed by Petitioner. Subject to notice and a resolution of the FTB's claim, a final account is waived. Approve $11,600 in statutory fees to Petitioner's counsel.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

AUGUSTO GAMBOA VS T&T TRUCKING GROUP, ET AL.

Defendant Maravillas Trucking LLC (“Maravillas”) is under a Franchise Tax Board suspension and thus is not permitted to defend itself in this action. (Palm Valley Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Design MTC (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 553, 556.) Maravillas' insurance carrier, American Sentinel Insurance Company seeks to intervene in this action in order to protect its own interests.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

AUGUSTO GAMBOA VS T&T TRUCKING GROUP, ET AL.

Defendant Maravillas Trucking LLC (“Maravilla”) is under a Franchise Tax Board suspension and thus is not permitted to defend itself in this action. (Palm Valley Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Design MTC (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 553, 556.) Maravilla’s insurance carrier, American Sentinel Insurance Company seeks to intervene in this action in order to protect its own interests.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

LYDIA HARRIS VS KEVIN GILLIAM

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Lydia Harris OPPOSITION: Defendant Wasserman, Comden, & Casselman, LLP This Action: In February 2002, Plaintiff Lydia Harris sued defendants Marion Knight (“Knight”) and the music label Death Row Records alleging that she owned fifty percent of Death Row Records. In March 2005, the court entered a judgment in favor o...

  • Hearing

    Sep 09, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

BETH BOGAERTS VS THOMAS SCHOENBERGER, ET AL.

In support, Plaintiff presents the following pieces of evidence: An Annual Franchise Tax Report for ShadowBox, the company which the parties allegedly formed (Compl. ¶¶ 13-20). (Pl. Decl. Ex. B.) The tax report is dated October 2017. (Ibid.) The report lists ShadowBox’s principal place of business as 4415 Westchester Drive, Woodland Hills, CA 91364 and lists Schoenberger as the company’s president and director. (Ibid.) Address information from Schoenberger’s PayPal account. (Pl. Decl. Ex. C.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 09, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 72     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.