Welsh v. Department of Revenue

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Income Tax ARLENE J. WELSH, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Oregon, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) TC-MD 060491D DECISION OF DISMISSAL This matter is before the court on its own motion to dismiss this case for want of prosecution. A case management conference was scheduled on June 14, 2006, to consider Plaintiff's appeal. On May 16, 2006, notice of the case management conference was sent to Plaintiff at 1232 SE 32nd Avenue, Hillsboro, Oregon 97123, which was the address Plaintiff provided to the court. The notice was not returned as undeliverable. Plaintiff did not appear at the case management conference, and there was no explanation for Plaintiff's failure to appear. On June 14, 2006, the court sent Plaintiff a letter, which explained the importance of diligently pursuing an appeal. This letter was not returned as undeliverable. The letter advised that if Plaintiff did not provide a written explanation by June 29, 2006, for her failure to appear, the court would dismiss the appeal. As of this date, Plaintiff has not contacted the court. Under such circumstances, the court finds the appeal must be dismissed for want of prosecution. Now, therefore, /// /// /// DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 060491D 1 IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that this matter be dismissed. Dated this ____ day of July 2006. ______________________________ JILL A. TANNER PRESIDING 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 Presiding Magistrate Jill A. Tanner on July 7, 2006. The Court filed and entered this document on July 7, 2006. DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 060491D 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.