Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ferguson v. Commissioner of Tax and Finance

United States District Court, W.D. New York

May 11, 2017

JEREMIAH M. FERGUSON, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISIONER OF TAX AND FINANCE, Defendant.

          For Plaintiff: Jeremiah M. Ferguson, pro se

          For Defendant: Heather Lynn McKay, A.A.G. New York State Attorney General's Office

          DECISION & ORDER

          CHARLES J. SIRAGUSA, United States District Judge.

         INTRODUCTION

         This civil rights case is before the Court on the following motions:

Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, Sept. 7, 2016, ECF No. 5;
Defendant's Motion for Sanctions, Sept. 7, 2016, ECF No. 4;
Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss, Oct. 27, 2016, ECF No. 8; and
Plaintiffs Motion to Withdraw, Nov. 3, 2016, ECF No. 9.

         For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs motion to withdraw is granted, his motion to dismiss is denied as withdrawn, and Defendant's motions are granted.

         FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         On June 29, 2016, Plaintiff commenced this equal protection action against Defendant. Plaintiff claims that the New York State Tax Law, particularly section 1101, violates his Equal Protection rights. In that regard, Plaintiff contends that:

New York sales tax law, in relevant part, 1101-3-b. is manifestly COERCIVE! The provision, 1101-3-b, pays consumers to shun the public market and limit the sale of their property to a trade-in. That coercion by the Commissiomer [sic] of Taxation and Finance was rejected and the double taxation the Commissioner commands in the public market was suffered when plaintiff sold his used bed in that market for 100 dollars (no tax credit) and purchased a freezer for 250 dollars and paid 8% sales tax. Therein plaintiffs equal protection rights where [sic] twice violated by the Commissioner.

Compl. at 4. Defendant now moves to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and (6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and seeks sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.

         Plaintiff responded to Defendant's motion to dismiss on September 9, 2016, ECF No. 7. Plaintiff later filed a motion to dismiss his own action, in which he stated that "it is perceived to pose a threat to plaintiffs life." Motion for Dismissal, Oct. 25, 2016, ECF No. 8. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Withdraw Plaintiff's Motion for Dismissal, Nov. 3, 2016, ECF No. 9. The Court grants Plaintiffs motion to withdraw, ECF No. 9, and denies his Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 8. Therefore, the only two remaining motions are Defendant's for dismissal and for imposition of sanctions.

         STANDARDS OF LAW

         Motion ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.