Persons who may appeal due to acts or omissions
Source:
Section 305.275 — Persons who may appeal due to acts or omissions, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors305.html.
Notes of Decisions
Under former similar statute
Plaintiffs were entitled to appeal to Department of Revenue under this section when significant change of position by assessor affecting their property occurred too late to allow them to appeal to board of equalization. Moore v. Dept. of Rev., 4 OTR 573 (1971)
Jurisdiction over question of applicability of partial exemption lies not with board of equalization under ORS 309.100, but pursuant to provisions of [former] ORS 306.520. Heenan and Domogalla v. Dept. of Rev., 5 OTR 78 (1972)
COMPLETED CITATIONS: Emanuel Lutheran Charity Bd. v. Dept. of Rev., 4 OTR 410 (1971), aff’d 263 Or 287, 502 P2d 251 (1972)
In general
Appealing party from an order of Multnomah County Board of Equalization reducing true cash value must be Department of Administrative Services of Multnomah County, acting through its appropriate officer. Multnomah County v. Dept. of Revenue, 8 OTR 422 (1980)
After valuation of property is placed on tax rolls and affirmed by a board of equalization, assessor may not correct “value judgment” and is not aggrieved party for purposes of this section. Wynne v. Dept of Revenue, 9 OTR 378 (1983)
Appeal under this section of alleged overvaluation of property in one tax year was insufficient to invoke department’s supervisory authority under ORS 306.115 to correct erroneous valuations made in earlier years. ESCO Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 307 Or 639, 772 P2d 413 (1989)
Where legislature recognized taxpayer’s interest in [former] ORS 311.215 and assessor denied relief plaintiff was seeking, plaintiff-taxpayer was aggrieved by act or omission of assessor and has standing to seek writ of mandamus against county assessor. NW Medical Lab. v. Good Samaritan Hospital, 309 Or 262, 786 P2d 718 (1990)
Appeal of disqualification for special farm use assessment must be made directly to department. Glancy v. Dept. of Rev., 12 OTR 117 (1991)
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)
To be “aggrieved,” taxpayer must have immediate claim of wrong. Kaady v. Dept. of Revenue, 15 OTR 124 (2000)
To prove “aggrievement,” requires showing that person suffered injury or wrong that creates a private interest in outcome that is different from interest of member of general public. Seneca Sustainable Energy, LLC v. Department of Revenue, 363 Or 782, 429 P3d 360 (2018)
Law Review Citations
In general
48 WLR 147 (2011)
Up to date