Legal Opinion

Peth v. Breitzmann

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

Decided March 22, 1985No. Civ. A. 84-C-1326PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION AND ORDER

REYNOLDS, Chief Judge.

This is a pro se tax protest action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ' Presently before the Court are defendants’ motions to dismiss and to jguash certain “common law liens” filed by plaintiff, and plaintiff’s “demand judgment by default,” “demand entry of summary judgment,” “demand of of [sic] this Court to stop the injury being performed by John/Jane does [sic] (1 through 500),” “Motions to Service [sic],” “Request That This Action Proceed Under Rules of Criminal Proceedure [sic] Rule (1), Rule (2), Rule (3) and Rule (4),” and plaintiff’s “Writs of Mandamus…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Brushaber v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. Sims v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  3. J. Douglas Kile v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, David Granzow v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Basic Bible Church of America, Auxiliary Chapter 1104, Herbert C. Graf, Apostle v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
  4. Moynihan Associates, Inc. v. HanischWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Whitman v. Department of TaxationWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Christensen v. WardCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
  2. Landess v. GARDNER TURF GRASS, INC.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. Abdo v. United States Internal Revenue ServiceDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2002
  4. United States v. RaymondDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1999
  5. United States v. MacElvainDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 1994

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API