The following excerpt is from Heimbach v. Chu, 744 F.2d 11 (2nd Cir. 1984):
Appellant contends that his claim is not within the Act because its primary challenge is to the legislative procedure rather than the resultant tax. See Parker v. Merlino, 493 F.Supp. 381, 386 (D.N.J.1980), aff'd, 646 F.2d 848, 852-53 n. 11 (3d Cir.1981). This argument is not persuasive.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.