Chiatello v. City and County of SF
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Filed 11/16/10 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO JOHN CHIATELLO, A126234 Plaintiff and Appellant, (San Francisco City & County Super. Ct. No. 483632 v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING PETITIONS FOR REHEARING Defendants and Respondents. BY THE COURT; The published opinion filed herein on October 21, 2010, is modified as follows: (1) On page 3, the first full paragraph shall read: In 2004, the City s voters declined to enact a measure which would have extended the Payroll Tax to pass-through entities, which were defined as including a trust, partnership, corporation described in Subchapter S of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, . . . limited liability company, limited liability partnership, professional corporation, and any other person or entity which is not subject to the income tax imposed by Subtitle A, Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, . . . or which is allowed a deduction in computing such tax for distributions to the owners or beneficiaries of such person or entity. (S.F. Bus. & Tax Regs. Code, §§ 902.1, 902.2.) (2) On page 3, the first sentence of the second full paragraph shall read: In 2008 the City s Board of Supervisors proposed another ballot proposition designated Proposition Q that was intended to clarify the reach of the Payroll Tax. (3) On page 3, the third sentence of the second full paragraph shall read: Concerning two provisions of the Payroll Tax that would be amended (i.e., S.F. Bus. & Tax Regs. Code, § § 902.1 and 902.2), the import of Proposition Q was explained to voters by the City Controller as follows: Some types of corporations compensate 1 their partners by paying them a share of the firm s annual profits in addition to any salary paid for services rendered. (4) On page 4, line 2, footnote 1 is deleted. These changes do not effect a change in the judgment. The petitions for rehearing are denied. Dated: _________________________ Acting P.J. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
