The Boeing Company v. Multnomah County Assessor

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Property Tax THE BOEING COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. MULTNOMAH COUNTY ASSESSOR, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) TC-MD 120274N DECISION Plaintiff filed its Complaint on April 12, 2012, challenging the assessment of property identified as Account R208337 (subject property) for the 2009-10 through 2011-12 tax years. By Order issued August 16, 2012, the court dismissed Plaintiff s appeal of the subject property for the 2009-10 and 2010-11 tax years, finding that Plaintiff failed to identify good and sufficient cause under ORS 305.288(3) for its failure to timely appeal those tax years. The parties filed a written Stipulation on January 8, 2013, agreeing that the value of the subject property was as follows for the 2011-12 tax year: Real Market Value Land: Improvements: Total: $ 5,548,460 $13,951,540 $19,500,000 Assessed Value: $16,610,500. Because the parties are in agreement, the case is ready for judgment. Now, therefore, IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that Plaintiff s appeal of property identified as Account R208337 for the 2009-10 and 2010-11 tax years is dismissed. IT IS FURTHER DECIDED that value of the property identified as Account R208337 was, as stipulated, for the 2011-12 tax year: /// DECISION TC-MD 120274N 1 Real Market Value Land: Improvements: Total: $ 5,548,460 $13,951,540 $19,500,000 Assessed Value: $16,610,500. Dated this day of January 2013. ALLISON R. BOOMER MAGISTRATE If you want to appeal this Decision, 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 Decision or this Decision becomes final and cannot be changed. This document was signed by Magistrate Allison R. Boomer on January 9, 2013. The Court filed and entered this document on January 9, 2013. DECISION TC-MD 120274N 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.