Matheson v. Washington Dept. of Revenue Cert Petition

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Matheson v Washington Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1. Did the state courts below err in entering a state excise tax and penalty judgment against a tribal Indian who is exempt from state taxes and who also had a state tobacco license to transport cigarettes free of state tax stamps?

2. Is a tribal Indian, whose only activity was to transport cargo in round trips to Indian reservations, exempt from state taxes under the Indian and interstate commerce clauses of the U.S. Constitution?

For the life of me, I can’t find the Washington Court of Appeals materials in this matter. Weird….

6 thoughts on “Matheson v. Washington Dept. of Revenue Cert Petition”

  1. Greg Dupuis August 8, 2013 / 9:12 am

    why are all the pages on the cert petition blank?

  3. Panesko, Joe (ATG) August 8, 2013 / 5:30 pm

    Responding to your aside: “For the life of me, I can’t find the Washington Court of Appeals materials in this matter. Weird….”

    You can’t find the material because the Washington State Court of Appeals used a relatively unknown decision process known as a “motion on the merits,” pursuant to Washington State Court Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP) 18.14 (available here ). This is essentially a summary process that determines the legal issues are so clear such that the case doesn’t warrant a full panel hearing and consideration. In Matheson, a court of appeals commissioner granted the motion on the merits to affirm the superior court ruling. Such commissioner rulings are not published, nor are they even made available on the court’s website, they’re simply mailed to the parties, and to my knowledge Westlaw doesn’t even report them.

    Matheson filed a motion to modify the court of appeals commissioner’s ruling, which motion went to a 3 judge panel of the court of appeals, and the panel denied the motion, which ruling again is not disseminated beyond the parties. Then Matheson sought review by the State Supreme Court, which denied review. That denial is noted in the reports at 177 Wn.2d 1004 (2013).

    So that’s why you’re not finding any opinions from the case.

    Joe Panesko [mailto:joep@atg.wa.gov]

    Washington State Assistant Attorney General

    Fish, Wildlife & Parks Division

    (360) 586-0643

  5. Pingback: Matheson v. Washington Dept. of Revenue Cert Petition | Round House Talk
  6. Pingback: The October 2013 Term Long Conference: Indian Law Edition | Turtle Talk

Comments are closed.