California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Crocker National Bank v. City and County of San Francisco, 264 Cal.Rptr. 139, 49 Cal.3d 881, 782 P.2d 278 (Cal. 1989):
Questions of fact concern the establishment of historical or physical facts; their resolution is reviewed under the substantial-evidence test. Questions of law relate to the selection of a rule; their resolution is reviewed independently. Mixed questions of law and fact concern the application of the rule to the facts and the consequent determination whether the rule is satisfied. If the pertinent inquiry requires application of experience with human affairs, the question is predominantly factual and its determination is reviewed under the substantial-evidence test. If, by contrast, the inquiry requires a critical consideration, in a factual context, of legal principles and their underlying values, the question is predominantly legal and its determination is reviewed independently. (See generally People v. Louis (1986) 42 Cal.3d 969, 985-987, 232 Cal.Rptr. 110, 728 P.2d 180.)
Thus, it is plain that on appeal a trial court's classification of a particular item as a fixture must be reviewed independently. The question of classification is mixed: it involves the application of the rule to the facts and the consequent determination whether the rule is satisfied. And the question is predominantly legal: the pertinent inquiry bears on the various policy considerations implicated in the solution of the problem of taxability, and therefore requires a critical consideration, in a factual context, of legal principles and their underlying values. (See generally Goldie v. Bauchet Properties (1975) 15 Cal.3d 307, 316, 124 Cal.Rptr. 161, 540 P.2d 1 [holding that "[u]nder California law, the classification
Page 143
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.