(DOWNLOAD) "State Ex Rel. Thompson v. Nash" by Supreme Court of Wisconsin * eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State Ex Rel. Thompson v. Nash
- Author : Supreme Court of Wisconsin
- Release Date : January 30, 1965
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 64 KB
Description
Prohibition upon the relation of the attorney general to prohibit Harold Nash, court commissioner for Milwaukee county, from
conducting a discovery examination of an employee of the Wisconsin department of taxation (hereinafter the "department") in
a proceeding pending before the Wisconsin board of tax appeals (hereinafter the "board"). The department made an assessment
of additional income taxes against one John H. Verdev covering the years 1946 through 1959. Due to lack of adequate books
and records this assessment was made by using the net-worth method. Double-rate penalties were also assessed under sec. 71.11
(6), Stats. Taxpayer made an application for abatement which secured some reduction in assessment. Taxpayer then petitioned
for a review and hearing before the board. As an incident to this pending proceeding, taxpayer noticed before Court Commissioner
Nash a discovery examination of one Miller, the department's employee who had made the audit. Nash issued a subpoena duces
tecum requiring the appearance of Miller and production of certain records of the department. The instant action was then
instituted by the attorney general praying for a writ of prohibition which would command Nash to desist from any further proceedings
in conducting the scheduled examination of Miller. An alternative writ of prohibition was issued January 23, 1964, which commanded
Nash to desist and refrain from any further proceedings upon the subpoena duces tecum until the further order of the court
and which required Nash to show cause why he should not be absolutely restrained from further proceedings in the matter. Nash
moved to quash the writ. By judgment (denominated an order) entered August 4, 1964, the court denied the motion to quash and directed the issuance
of an absolute writ of prohibition. Such absolute writ of prohibition was issued on the same day. Nash has appealed from the
judgment.