Twin Lakes Golf and Country Club v. King County
Washington Supreme Court
548 P.2d 538, 87 Wash. 2d 1, (1976)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
The Twin Lakes Golf and Country Club (the club) (plaintiff) owned a golf course inside the Twin Lakes Development (the development), a residential community made up of five subdivisions and over 1,000 single-family homes in King County, Washington (defendant). The development and the golf course were zoned and constructed as a planned-unit development, which required the developers to reserve land for a common open space to be enjoyed by the residents of the development. The golf course was designated as the common open space. The deeds for the development given to the developer specified that the golf course would remain common open space. The club operated the golf course at a loss. Due to the club’s lack of income, the King County Assessor (the assessor) assessed the value of the golf course through the cost approach, which calculated the cost of replacing the golf course, and found that the course had a value of $660,600. The assessor did not factor the zoning restrictions placed on the golf course into his assessment of the golf course’s value. The club paid property taxes on the assessed value of the golf course and appealed the assessment. The trial court found that the golf course had no taxable value because the restrictions on its use adversely affected its value, and the operation of the golf course was not profitable. King County appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Finley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
