Notes of Decisions
Presumption that official duty has been regularly performed does not relate to the correctness of the value ascribed to property by the assessor. J.R. Widmer, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 261 Or 371, 494 P2d 854 (1972)
It was permissible for county assessors appraisers to revise their presentation of value before the tax court following their experiences in the Board of Equalization and Department of Revenue hearing, under provision of this section that all proceedings before tax court shall be original, independent proceedings tried de novo. Price v. Dept. of Rev., 7 OTR 18 (1977)
Where an issue is not considered at the hearing before the board of equalization, but is raised at the Department of Revenue hearing, the issue is properly considered by the Tax Court. Oregon Broadcasting Co. v. Dept. of Rev., 287 Or 267, 598 P2d 689 (1979)
Writ of review is available before Oregon Tax Court. Rosboro Lumber Co. v. Heine, 289 Or 909, 618 P2d 960 (1980)
Under this section, Oregon Tax Court conducting original, independent...and de novo proceedings in property evaluation is not restricted to values previously alleged by parties on appeal to Department of Revenue. Mid Oil Company v. Dept of Revenue, 297 Or 583, 686 P2d 1020 (1984)
When Tax Court admits new evidence, it must evaluate that evidence and reach its own conclusions. Reed v. Dept. of Rev., 310 Or 260, 798 P2d 235 (1990)
On de novo review, Supreme Court reaches decision without regard to either partys prelitigation position. Reed v. Dept. of Rev., 310 Or 260, 798 P2d 235 (1990)
Whether earlier administrative determination in tax case should be given preclusive effect for subsequent years depends on formality of determination and other listed factors. Fisher Broadcasting, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev., 321 Or 341, 898 P2d 1333 (1995)
Where taxpayer challenges property assessment, de novo nature of proceeding permits assessor to introduce evidence establishing market value higher than appealed valuation and to obtain increased assessment. Clark v. Dept. of Revenue, 14 OTR 221 (1997)
Scope of review by regular division of tax court extends to procedural issues raised by decisions of magistrate division. Norpac Foods, Inc. v. Dept. of Revenue, 15 OTR 331 (2001)
Requirement for de novo review prevents reliance on record created in magistrate division absent consent of parties. Dept. of Revenue v. Guardian Management Corp., 16 OTR 17 (2002)
Requirement that judicial review be de novo does not apply to review of Department of Revenue decision under ORS 306.115 (General supervision over property tax system). ADC Kentrox v. Dept. of Revenue, 19 OTR 91 (2006)
Where tax court magistrate division dismisses action on procedural grounds, de novo review by regular division is limited to determining whether magistrate abused discretion. Freitag v. Dept. of Revenue, 19 OTR 144 (2006)
Chapter 305
Notes of Decisions
Policy of efficient and effective tax collection makes doctrine of estoppel against government in tax cases one of rare application. Pacific Conference v. Dept. of Rev., 7 OTR 429 (1978)
Law Review Citations
9 WLJ 193-260 (1973)
