Edit: According to [0] they don't need to. They just send you a notice and if you don't respond in time they take what they want. It's not clear what constitutes responding or how to get the case into a court and out of an administrative process. I don't know about the out-of-state bank thing.
[0] http://www.mass.gov/dor/businesses/help-and-resources/legal-...
Sounds to me like his beef could be with the Chicago CPA. CPAs are not created equal, and even the big 4 accounting firms make serious mistakes when things get complicated - has happened to me. Usually, when that happens, the CPA is responsible for fixing the problem (paying late fees, filings, etc.), but you're still liable for the underlying tax burden that they may have missed.
In any case, would be nice to know what the resolution was!
And your scenario doesn't fit here because the 'debt' is from after moving.
Can you explain?
More to the point, the update makes it clear he doesn't really have a beef with MA: he did owe the taxes.
"Again, I hadn't lived there or worked there since 2003, but I did own part of a business that was headquartered in MA, and the state was using this fact to harass me for income tax money."
So is the MA tax bill based on the profits of that business, or is the state just using it to say "you should pay all your income tax here"? Regardless, his beef should be with MA rather than the bank. I'd hardly fault Chase for complying with a court order - if crossing a state line made you judgement proof, why wouldn't everyone just run up debts, move one state over, and start fresh?