Slater v. Department of Revenue

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Income Tax SINE SLATER and RONALD SLATER, Plaintiffs, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Oregon, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) TC-MD 080451B 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 17, 2008, to consider Plaintiffs appeal. On April 29, 2008, notice of the case management conference was sent to Plaintiffs at 1815 NE Ainsworth Street, Portland, OR 97211, which was the address Plaintiffs provided to the court. The notice was not returned as undeliverable. Plaintiffs did not appear at the case management conference, and there was no explanation for Plaintiffs failure to appear. On June 17, 2008, the court sent Plaintiffs a letter, which explained the importance of diligently pursuing an appeal. That letter was not returned as undeliverable. The letter advised that if Plaintiffs did not provide a written explanation by June 30, 2008, for their failure to appear, the court would dismiss the appeal. As of this date, Plaintiffs have not contacted the /// /// /// /// /// DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 080451B 1 court. Under such circumstances, the court finds the appeal must be dismissed for want of prosecution. Now, therefore, IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that this matter be dismissed. Dated this ____ day of July 2008. ______________________________ JEFFREY S. MATTSON 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 Jeffrey S. Mattson on July 15, 2008. The Court filed and entered this document on July 15, 2008. DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 080451B 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.