Deguire v. Marion Co.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Small Claims Property Tax NORMA M. DEGUIRE, Plaintiff, v. MARION COUNTY ASSESSOR, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) TC-MD 040890C DECISION and JUDGMENT Plaintiff requested that the taxes for the subject property, a trailer, be stricken from the roll for tax years 2001-02, 2002-03, and 2003-04, because the structure was torn down in 2001. In its Answer, Defendant requested that the account be deleted beginning with the 2002-03 tax year. A telephonic case management conference was held September 13, 2004. The property is identified in the county assessor s records as account number M125682. The unit belonged to Plaintiff s deceased mother.1 The parties agree that the property was razed September 17, 2001, and the rubble removed from the land. That occurred after the January 1, 2001, assessment date for the 2001-02 tax year. See ORS 308.007(2)(a) (providing that the January 1 assessment date corresponds to the tax year beginning on July 1); ORS 308.105(1) (providing that personal property be assessed at its situs as of the day and hour of assessment ); and ORS 308.210(1) (providing for a January 1 assessment date on which all taxable property is assessed). 2 Property in existence on the assessment date is subject to tax. Id. Accordingly, the 1 Plaintiff appealed after receiving a Notice of Delinquent Property Taxes dated M ay 24, 2004. At the September 13 , 2004, case management conference, Defendant s representative Jeff Proctor stated that the delinquent tax notice was mailed to the wrong address and that the ad dress should have b een up dated after mail was returned in 200 3. The ad dress problem may ha ve unnecessarily increased the liability by adding warrant fees of $1 41. P laintiff will pursue that issue with the tax collector. 2 Unless otherwise noted, all references to the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) are to 1999. DECISION and JUDGMENT TC-MD 040890C 1 tax imposed for tax year 2001-02 must stand. However, the value should be stricken from the roll for the subsequent tax years because it did not exist on or after January 1, 2002, which is the assessment date for the 2002-03 tax year. ORS 308.210(1) (2001). Now, therefore, IT IS ADJUDGED that Plaintiff s appeal is dismissed as to the 2001-02 tax year; and IT IS FURTHER ADJUDGED that the value shall be stricken from the tax roll for the 2002-03 and 2003-04 tax years and that the corresponding tax be canceled. Dated this _____ day of September 2004. _____________________________________ DAN ROBINSON MAGISTRATE THIS DOCUMENT IS FINAL AND MAY NOT BE APPEALED. ORS 305.514. THIS DOCUMENT WAS SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE DAN ROBINSON SEPTEMBER 16, 2004. THE COURT FILED THIS DOCUMENT SEPTEMBER 16, 2004. DECISION and JUDGMENT TC-MD 040890C 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.
