Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Jensen v. Franchise Tax Bd., No. B211815

By FindLaw Staff on October 16, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the Mental Health Services Act, which expands funding for mental health services for all Californians by imposing an additional tax of 1 percent on annual income in excess of $1 million, trial court judgment is affirmed as there is no constitutional infirmity in the Act as an income tax may be rationally based on a taxpayer's income level and ability to pay, and there is no need to show that a particular taxpayer personally benefits from a tax assessed for the public good.     

Read Jensen v. Franchise Tax Bd., No. B211815

Filed October 14, 2009


Opinion by Judge Boren


For Appellant:  Lappen and Lappen, Jonathan Bailey Lappen; Moxon & Kobrin, Kendrick L. Moxon

For Appellee:  Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, W. Dean Freeman, Felix E. Leatherwood, Anthony F. Sgherzi, Deputy Attorneys General

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard