Case law

Roseburg Forest Products Co. v. Department of Revenue

14 Or. Tax 417 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 4, 1998

Simplot Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 321 Or 253, 264 , 897 P2d 316 (1995). PLAINTIFFS’ EVIDENCE Plaintiffs’ appraisers were both very experienced, and very knowledgeable. … However, he was unable to find any sales of particle board plants.

Dolgos v. Washington Cty. Assessor, Tc-Md 090299b (or.tax 11-24-2009)

Oregon Tax Court · Nov 24, 2009

The Washington County Board of Property Tax Appeals (BOPTA) sustained Defendant's original total RMV of $736,780. Plaintiffs requested at trial a reduction to $630,000 RMV. … Feves v. Dept. of Revenue , 4 OTR 302 , 312 (1971). "[I]f the evidence is inconclusive or unpersuasive, the taxpayer will have failed to meet his burden of proof." Reed v.

Knapp II v. City of Jacksonville

18 Or. Tax 236 · Oregon Tax Court · Jul 5, 2005

Knapp I v. City of Jacksonville, 18 OTR 22 (2004). The content of that order is adopted by reference. … Smith v. Multnomah County Board of Commissioners, 318 Or 302, 309-10 , 865 P2d 356 (1994).

Birch v. Multnomah County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 12, 2013

Defendant was represented by Jeff Brown (Brown) and Barry Dayton (Dayton), Registered Appraiser III, who prepared Defendant’s appraisal report for this appeal. (Def’s Ex A at 20.) … Feves v. Dept. of Revenue, 4 OTR 302, 312 (1971); see also Riley Hill General Contractor, Inc. v.

Broken Trail LLC v. Deschutes County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Sep 6, 2024

See Kaady v. … See Shevtsov v.

Archdiocese of Portland v. Department of Revenue

5 Or. Tax 111 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 29, 1972

See, also, Assessor of Dover v. Dominican Fathers, Etc., 334 Mass 530, 137 NE2d 225 (1956). One of the earlier Pennsylvania cases seems to be quite similar to the present case. In Board of Home Missions, Etc. v. … House v.

Medford v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Jun 20, 2025

McMillan v. Comm’r, 105 T.C.M. (CCH) 1263 (2013), 2013 WL 461640 at *4 (US Tax Ct) (quoting Wolf v. Comm’r, 4 F3d 709, 713 (9th Cir. 1993)). … Metz v. Comm’r, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1248 (2015), 2015 WL 1285276 at *10 (US Tax Ct). Plaintiffs argue that they operated the horse boarding facility as a business with the intent to make a profit.

Associated Computer Services, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

7 Or. Tax 1 · Oregon Tax Court · Jan 10, 1977

Heenan and Domogalla v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 78 (1972); Marriott v. Dept. of Revenue, 4 OTR 508 (1971); Sisters of Charity v. Wash. Cty. Com., 3 OTR 106 (1967). … Freightliner Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 270 (1973), 6 OTR 70 (1975), aff'd on this issue, 275 Or 13 , 549 P2d 662 (1976); Georgia-Pacific v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 33 (1972).

Astoria Plywood Corp. v. Department of Revenue

7 Or. Tax 265 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 2, 1977

Dept. of Rev., 6 OTR 40 (1975)), and for January 1,1973 (Astoria Plywood Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 6 OTR 57 (1975)). … Upon appeal by the taxpayer, a reduction in value was made by the county board of equalization. The county assessor appealed to the defendant to restore the values.

Bellotti v. Department of Revenue

12 Or. Tax 543 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 22, 1993

In McCormick v. Dept. of Rev., 10 OTR 380 (1987), this court found that a chairperson of the board who had no corporate authority or control to pay withholding tax was not personally liable for withholding taxes. … See Frutiger v. Department of Revenue, supra; Olson v. Dept. of Rev., 304 Or at 247 .

Renville v. Department of Revenue

5 Or. Tax 202 · Oregon Tax Court · Mar 20, 1973

Brown v. Helvering [ 4 USTC ¶ 1223 ], 291 U. S. 193, 200 (1933). * * *” Rath Packing Co. v. Bacon, 255 F Supp 809 (SD Iowa 1966), 17 AFTR2d 1023, 66-1 USTC ¶ 9431 . … United States v. Anderson, supra.

Equitable Savings & Loan Ass'n v. State Tax Commission

3 Or. Tax 1 · Oregon Tax Court · May 5, 1967

Savings & Loan Ass’n v. … Co. v. Commissioner, 284 U.S. 552, 562 , Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v.

Lee v. Marion County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 1, 2016

) ) Plaintiff, ) TC-MD 150431N ) v. … Here, Plaintiff has not appealed an order of the board of property tax appeals, although he was eligible to appeal the value of the subject property to the board.

Gray v. Multnomah County Assessor, Tc 4810 (or.tax 4-8-2008)

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 8, 2008

Taxpayer did not appeal the RMV of the property to the Board of Property Tax Appeals (BOPTA). (Ex A to Compl at 1.) On November 8, 2007, Taxpayer filed an appeal in the Magistrate Division of this court. … V.

Dedlovskiy v. Multnomah County Assessor, Tc-Md 100313b (or.tax 12-10-2010)

Oregon Tax Court · Dec 10, 2010

The Multnomah County Board of Property Tax Appeals (BOPTA) sustained Defendant's original total real market value (RMV) of $412,290. Plaintiff now seeks a reduction to $300,000 RMV. … Feves v. Dept. of Revenue , 4 OTR 302 , 312 (1971). "[I]f the evidence is inconclusive or unpersuasive, the taxpayer will have failed to meet his burden of proof * * *." Reed v.

Holland v. Multnomah County Assessor, Tc-Md 110458c (or.tax 12-14-2011)

Oregon Tax Court · Dec 14, 2011

Id. ; see also Sherman v. Dept. of Rev. , 17 OTR 322 , 323 (2004) (ruling that where a requested reduction in RMV will not affect property taxes taxpayers are not aggrieved); Kaady v. … *Page 4 IT IS FURTHER DECIDED that tax year 2010-11 is dismissed because Plaintiffs are satisfied with the value reduction ordered by the BOPTA and are therefore not aggrieved by the Board's action.

Donahue v. Multnomah County Assessor, Tc-Md 110242c (or.tax 11-23-2011)

Oregon Tax Court · Nov 23, 2011

The appeal is timely from an order of the county board of property tax appeals (Board). Trial in the matter was held by telephone November 3, 2011. Plaintiff appeared and testified on his own behalf. … Plaintiff appealed the values of the property to the Board *Page 2 and the Board sustained the values. Plaintiff timely appealed to this court.

Evergreen Aviation & Space Museum v. Yamhill Cty. Assessor

22 Or. Tax 216 · Oregon Tax Court · Apr 15, 2016

Taxpayer points to displays, information boards and other items that could serve to educate about water and flight. Defendant-Intervenor Department of Revenue (the department) has a different perspective. … Assessor II v. Jehovah’s Witnesses, 18 OTR 409, 422 (2006).

Huang v. Jefferson County Assessor, Tc-Md 080385b (or.tax 12-4-2008)

Oregon Tax Court · Dec 4, 2008

Upon appeal to the Jefferson County Board of Property Tax Appeals, the real market value (RMV) was reduced. The maximum assessed value (MAV) remained unchanged. … *Page 3 This court has many times repeated its holding on the subject of uniformity in Ellis v. Lorati : "The court recognizes that in one sense MAV is somewhat artificial or arbitrary.

Clackamas County Assessor v. Fulmer, Tc-Md 100407d (or.tax 2-16-2011)

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 16, 2011

*Page 4 Fulmer requested that the court agree with the Board of Property Tax Appeals and determine that the real market value of the subject property as of January 1, 2009, was $709,569. II. … See Richardson v. Clackamas County Assessor , TC-MD No 020869D, WL 21263620 at *2 (Mar 26, 2003) (citing Gangle v. Dept. of Rev ., 13 OTR 343 , 345 (1995)).