Judge Recuses Himself From Measure ULA Lawsuit

Los Angeles Superior Court will get a third attempt to find a judge for the highly anticipated legal challenge to the city’s controversial Measure ULA transfer tax.

The second jurist assigned to the case, Superior Court Judge Joseph Lipner, recused himself after presiding over the case for about 10 days. During that span, an article by TRD quoted a lawyer working on the civil suit who questioned the propriety of Lipner for the case.

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association et al vs City of Los Angeles involves numerous parties, including landlord Newcastle Courtyards and the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles as plaintiffs and the Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing as a defendant.

In the TRD story on Aug. 11, Keith Fromm, an attorney representing Newcastle, questioned Lipner’s aptness for the assignment because he formerly worked as a partner with the firm Irell & Manella, which represents Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing in this case.

“To put it bluntly, whatever the reality may be, the appearance stinks. Without in any way casting any aspersions on Judge Lipner, I would hope that he would follow the most ethical and ‘above reproach’ course and simply recuse himself from this case,” Fromm said at the time.

On Aug. 15, plaintiffs filed a request for a new judge.

In court papers filed Aug. 17, Lipner recused himself. A new judge has not been assigned to the case. Its next hearing is scheduled for Sept. 21.

The case’s first judge, Curtis Kin gave notice in May that he was being reassigned to Los Angeles Superior Court’s Writ and Receivers Department.

In the Aug 17. court filing, Lipner recused himself because of California civil code which notes that the judge should request recusal if it is believed recusal would further the interests of justice, or if the judge believes that there is a substantial doubt on capacity to be impartial, or if a person following the case might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge could be impartial.

The filing did not add further commentary on why Lipner recused himself.

Fromm said the integrity of the case had been preserved so far. “Judge Lipner did the right thing and recused himself from this case,” Fromm wrote in an email. “It is a tenet of law that not only must justice be done, but that it must be seen to be done.”

The new judge will decide if the city of Los Angeles has the authority to levy a transfer tax, which imposes a 4 percent tax on transfers of real property with a gross value between $5 million and $10 million, and a 5.5 percent tax on transfers of property with a gross value exceeding $10 million.

In the case, some plaintiffs argue that Measure ULA enacted a “special tax” that local governments don’t have authority to impose. Other plaintiffs allege that the tax violates the Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.