Gardner v. DOR

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE MAGISTRATE DIVISION OF THE OREGON TAX COURT Timber Tax WILLIAM C. GARDNER, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, STATE OF OREGON, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 000296D DECISION A Complaint was filed in this matter and was served on defendant. Defendant's Answer was filed on April 18, 2000, and defendant is in partial agreement with the facts set forth in plaintiff's Complaint. A case management conference was held on Wednesday, June 21, 2000. Mr. William C. Gardner represented himself. Mr. Bill Carter appeared on behalf of defendant. During the conference, the parties agreed that Mr. Gardner had correctly filed the standard form to report his Eastern Oregon Privilege Taxes for tax year 1996. In addition, Mr. Gardner stated that he originally claimed credit for a timber tax payment which he subsequently discovered he inadvertently failed to mail. The parties agreed that the balance due for the timber tax for tax year 1996 is $175.87, including interest in the amount of $7.28. Mr. Gardner agreed to send the check following this proceeding. Mr. Carter advised Mr. Gardner to put the following information on the face of his check: BIN 1030883-8; Tax Year 1996; EOPT. There is no matter remaining in dispute. After a full review and the court DECISION 1 being fully advised, now, therefore; IT IS THE DECISION OF THE COURT as follows: Plaintiff's timber tax liability for tax year 1996 is $175.87, including interest. Dated this ____ day of June, 2000. _________________________________ JILL A. TANNER MAGISTRATE IF YOU WANT TO APPEAL THIS DECISION, FILE A COMPLAINT IN THE REGULAR DIVISION OF THE OREGON TAX COURT, FOURTH FLOOR, 1241 STATE ST., SALEM, OR 97310. 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 JILL A. TANNER ON JUNE 29, 2000. THE COURT FILED THIS DOCUMENT ON JUNE 29, 2000. DECISION 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.