POLAROID CORPORATION vs. COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
John S. Brown for the taxpayer.
Douglas H. Wilkins, Assistant Attorney General, for the Commissioner of Revenue.
Polaroid Corporation appeals from a decision of the Appellate Tax Board denying applications for abatement and upholding determinations made by the Commissioner of Revenue that Polaroid was not entitled to job incentive deductions claimed on its corporate excise tax returns for the tax years 1979, 1980, and 1981. We transferred the case to this court on our own motion.
We have decided today in Digital Equip. Corp. v. Commissioner of Revenue, ante 18 (1990), that a corporate taxpayer claiming job incentive deductions for the years 1980 through 1982 is entitled to the full job incentive deductions claimed in the case of employees who were certified by the urban job incentive bureau (UJIB) and domiciled in municipalities designated on the applicable UJIB list as containing "eligible sections of substantial poverty." We also decided that the taxpayer is entitled to those job incentive deductions not exceeding $5,000 for employees who were certified by UJIB and who were domiciled in "contiguous" municipalities under G. L. c. 23B, Section 11 (1988 ed.), and had not moved prior to the tax years at issue.
That decision is dispositive of the issues raised in this appeal. We remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
So ordered.
FRANK J. CAMOSCIO vs. BOARD OF REGISTRATION IN PODIATRY.
Frank J. Camoscio, pro se, submitted a brief.
The plaintiff, Frank J. Camoscio, appeals from the dismissal by a single justice of his complaint for equitable relief pursuant to G. L. c. 214, Section 1 (1988 ed.). The plaintiff seeks equitable relief for the same issues he previously has brought to the court's attention. See Camoscio v. Board of Registration in Podiatry, 394 Mass. 1006, 1006-1007 (1985). See also Camoscio v. Board of Registration in Podiatry, 385 Mass. 1002-1003, cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1139 (1982); Camoscio v. Board of Registration in Podiatry of Mass., United States District Court Civil Action No. 85-3460-MA. The complaint was correctly dismissed by the single justice. It raises
Page 1002
no issues not raised in the prior appeals or complaints and discloses no basis for equitable relief.
The judgment is affirmed. Further, it is ordered that neither the clerk of this court for Suffolk County (single justice session) nor the clerk for the Commonwealth (full court) accept any further filings from the plaintiff unless at least four Justices of this court authorize the filing.
So ordered.