Legal Opinion
Ellis v. Lorati
Oregon Tax Court
Decided February 23, 1999No. TC 4306; TC 4316; TC 4317; TC 4318; TC 4319; TC 4324PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CARL N. BYERS, Judge.
In all of these appeals, Defendants (taxpayers) challenge their 1997-98 maximum assessed value (MAV). In each case, the magistrate held that Article XI, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, allows a taxpayer to show a lesser 1995-96 real market value when contesting their 1997-98 MAV. The Multnomah County Assessor appealed each Decision to the Regular Division of this court, and the Department of Revenue has intervened. There is no dispute of material fact. Therefore, all of the appeals have been consolidated for decision and submitted to the court on cross motions for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Monaghan v. School District No. 1Oregon Supreme Court · 1957
- Roseburg School District v. City of RoseburgOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Taylor v. Clackamas County AssessorOregon Tax Court · 1999
- Coultas v. City of SutherlinOregon Supreme Court · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Department of Revenue v. FromanOregon Tax Court · 1999
- Su v. Department of RevenueOregon Tax Court · 2001
- Bulldog Financial v. Lane County Assessor, Tc-Md 080211b (or.tax 11-28-2008)Oregon Tax Court · 2008
- Burgoyne v. Wallowa County Assessor, Tc-Md 100525b (or.tax 9-22-2010)Oregon Tax Court · 2010
- Caruso v. Lane County Assessor, Tc-Md 080368c (or.tax 7-25-2008)Oregon Tax Court · 2008
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.