9th Cir.;
15-15296

The court of appeals affirmed a judgment. The court held that because California law provides a “plain, speedy and efficient remedy” for resolving taxpayer disputes, the Tax Injunction Act barred the district court from intervening.

In 1997, the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) assessed Gilbert Hyatt some $7.4 million in taxes in income earned in 1991 and 1992. Without first paying his taxes, Hyatt challenged his tax bill on the grounds that he was a resident of Nevada during 1991 and 1992. The FTB issued a decision 11 years later upholding the assessment. Hyatt appealed that determination to the California State Board of Equalization (SBE). That appeal, filed in 2008, remained pending. In 2014, Hyatt filed suit against the FTB and SBE under 42 U.S.C. §1983, seeking to enjoin the pending administrative tax review process. Hyatt alleged violations of the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, and alleged that he “can no longer receive a full and fair adjudication on the merits due to the extreme passage of time and resulting loss of material evidence.” He claimed that during the long delay in the administrative process, “material witnesses have passed away, memories of witnesses have faded, and documents relevant and important to Hyatt are no longer available.” In addition, his tax bill, with interest, had ballooned to over $55 million.