The opinion
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT
MAGISTRATE DIVISION
Property Tax
BRIAN METKE, )
)
Plaintiff, ) TC-MD 160218R
)
v. )
)
JEFFERSON COUNTY ASSESSOR, )
)
Defendant. ) FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL1
This matter came before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on the ground that
Plaintiff failed to appeal within the 30 days required by ORS 305.280(4). Plaintiff filed a
response. The matter is now ready for decision.
A review of Plaintiff’s materials shows the Jefferson County Board of Property Appeals
Order of Dismissal was mailed to Plaintiff on March 9, 2016. Plaintiff’s Complaint was filed on
May 9, 2016. That interval is longer than the 30 days required by ORS 305.280(4), which
provides:
“ * * * [A]n appeal to the tax court * * * from an order of a county board of
property tax appeals shall be filed within 30 days after the date of * * * mailing of
the notice of the order * * *.”
Plaintiff acknowledges that he missed the deadline. Under certain circumstances the
court can allow a complaint to continue even though it does not meet the requirements of
ORS 305.280.2 ORS 305.288(3) provides that “the tax court may order a change * * * to the
assessment *** if * * * the assessor or taxpayer has no statutory right of appeal remaining and
///
1
The court entered its Decision of Dismissal in this matter on August 18, 2016. Plaintiff filed a request for
reconsideration on September 2, 2016. The court’s analysis and determination of Plaintiff’s request for
reconsideration is contained in this Final Decision of Dismissal, which otherwise incorporates its Decision of
Dismissal without change. The court did not receive a statement of costs and disbursements within 14 days after its
Decision of Dismissal was entered. See Tax Court Rule–Magistrate Division (TCR–MD) 16 C(1).
2
The court’s references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 2015.
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 160218R 1
the tax court determines that good and sufficient cause exists for the failure by the assessor or
taxpayer to pursue the statutory right of appeal.”
ORS 305.288(5)(b) defines “[g]ood and sufficient cause” as:
“(A) * * * an extraordinary circumstance that is beyond the control of the
taxpayer, or the taxpayer’s agent or representative, and that causes the taxpayer,
agent or representative to fail to pursue the statutory right of appeal; and
“(B) Does not include inadvertence, oversight, lack of knowledge, hardship or
reliance on misleading information provided by any person except an authorized
tax official providing the relevant misleading information.”
Plaintiff explains in his response to Defendant’s motion that he appealed late because he
erroneously used a calendar from Jefferson County, Colorado, instead of Jefferson County,
Oregon. Plaintiff’s explanation represents inadvertence and/or reliance on misleading
information he obtained on the internet. His mistaken belief that he was following the correct
appeals deadline was not an extraordinary circumstance.
On September 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed a letter with the court requesting reconsideration of
the Decision of Dismissal. The Magistrate Division has a rule governing requests for
reconsideration. Tax Court Rule-Magistrate Division 18 C states:
“Following issuance of decision, final decision, or judgment, the court will not
accept motions for reconsideration or to reopen the record; therefore, the
provisions of TCR 80 are inapplicable in the Magistrate Division.”
The court finds the request must be denied. Now, therefore,
IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is allowed.
Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed.3
///
///
3
The court also notes that Plaintiff’s Complaint seeks an increase to the real market value of the subject
property. As pled, Plaintiff would not be aggrieved and the court would not have jurisdiction pursuant to ORS
305.275(1)(a)(B). Additionally, allegations that Defendant violated his “Due Process” rights by taking property, and
a resulting neighbor dispute are not within the jurisdiction of the Tax Court. ORS 305.410; Sanok v. Grimes, 294 Or
684, 662 P2d 693 (1983).
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 160218R 2
IT IS FURTHER DECIDED that Plaintiff’s request for reconsideration of the Decision of
Dismissal is denied.
Dated this day of September 2016.
RICHARD DAVIS
MAGISTRATE
If you want to appeal this Final Decision of Dismissal, file a complaint in the
Regular Division of the Oregon Tax Court, by mailing to: 1163 State Street,
Salem, OR 97301-2563; or by hand delivery to: Fourth Floor, 1241 State Street,
Salem, OR.
Your complaint must be submitted within 60 days after the date of the Final
Decision of Dismissal or this Final Decision of Dismissal cannot be changed.
TCR-MD 19 B.
This document was filed and entered on September 7, 2016.
FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 160218R 3