1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.App.3d
  4. 185 Cal.App.3d
  5. 185 Cal.App.3d 616 (1986)
 

SKLAR v. FRANCHISE TAX BOARD

Docket No. A032762.

185 Cal.App.3d 616 (1986)

230 Cal. Rptr. 42

RICHARD SKLAR et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. FRANCHISE TAX BOARD, Defendant and Respondent.

Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Four.

September 17, 1986.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

COUNSEL

Robert L. Gnaizda, Sidney M. Wolinsky and James R. Wheaton for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

John K. Van de Kamp, Attorney General, and Julian O. Standen, Deputy Attorney General, for Defendant and Respondent.

OPINION

SABRAW, J.

Today we consider whether taxpayers can obtain mandamus to compel the State Franchise Tax Board (Board) to adopt certain specific procedures to control the use of alcohol entertainment expense as a business deduction on state income tax returns. We conclude that mandamus will not lie to direct the manner in which the Board shall exercise its delegated authority to...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases