Federal Appeals Judges Toss Wireless-Service Tax Question Back to State High Court

摘要

A federal appeals court asked the Washington Supreme Court to decide whether a wireless ncarrier’s billing practices violate state law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San nFrancisco said in an order on Jared Peck v. AT&T Mobility that "it is not clear how the nWashington Supreme Court would rule" and it sought guidance. In 2004, James Bowden nbought three cellphones and signed three service plans at a Cingular kiosk in a mall. He later ntook the carrier to court to challenge a state business and occupations charge imposed on neach bill, though the service contract he initialed noted that he would have to pay "applicable ntaxes and governmental fees, whether assessed directly upon you or upon Cingular." Peck, nwho had filed a lawsuit alleging similar facts in Washington state court joined the suit and nasked that it be expanded to cover other customers of Cingular, now AT&T. The case was nremoved to a federal district court in Washington, where the judge granted AT&T summary njudgment, relying on Riensche v. Cingular Wireless concerning a similar wireless contract sold nonline.