Nast

Nast v. State Board of Equalization

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 541·46 Cal. App. 4th 343·53 Cal. Rptr. 2d 592·96 Daily Journal DAR 6623·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4127
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 8, 1996C020897California2,078 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nicholson, J.

Thomas Nast objected to certain tax assessments. The Franchise Tax Board (FTB) rejected those objections. The State Board of Equalization (SBE) agreed with FTB. Nast asked SBE to reconsider. It declined. Nast, having paid the taxes in question during pendency of the SBE proceedings, missed the 90-day statutory deadline to file a tax refund action. Seeking to avoid that failure, Nast filed this petition for a writ of mandate (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5) directing SBE to reverse itself and to order FTB to issue the refunds. SBE demurred and asserted Nast’s exclusive remedy is a suit for a tax refund. The Sacramento Superior Court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend and entered judgment of dismissal.

On appeal, Nast contends SBE’s demurrer was erroneously sustained because he was entitled to an order “directing [SBE] to support its decision with appropriate findings based upon evidence properly received.” We affirm the judgment.

Factual and Procedural Background

On his 1983 and 1984 federal and state income tax returns, Nast, an attorney, claimed certain “federal tax benefits” related to his acquisition of a solar power module unit. Several years later, Nast…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.