Lioy-Ryan v. Department of Revenue

Opinion

IN THE OREGON TAX COURT REGULAR DIVISION Income Tax

SHAWN M. LIOY-RYAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) TC 5153 v. ) ) DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ) State of Oregon, ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ) MOTIONS AND GRANTING Defendant. ) DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

This matter is before the court on the Motion of Default by Plaintiff (taxpayer), the

Motion to Dismiss by Defendant (department) and the Motion Asserting Estoppel by taxpayer.

Neither party has requested oral argument.

Plaintiff’s Motion of Default is denied. The response of the department to taxpayer’s

complaint was a Motion to Dismiss and that motion was timely filed under the rules of the court.

Plaintiff’s Motion Asserting Estoppel is denied. Taxpayer does not assert or establish

that any action of the department or its representatives was such as to excuse him from the

obligations to pay the tax due or apply for hardship relief in timely fashion. Those obligations

arise under the statutes and rules of this court and taxpayer was notified by this court of the

nature of those obligations. Taxpayer neither alleges nor shows that this court or any of its

representatives in any way qualified the obligations he had with respect to payment of tax,

obligations he did not satisfy.

The Motion to Dismiss of the department is granted. Plaintiff did not comply with the

requirements of ORS 305.419.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS Page 1 of 2 Now, therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions are denied; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted.

Dated this ___ day of March, 2013.

Henry C. Breithaupt Judge

THIS DOCUMENT WAS SIGNED BY JUDGE HENRY C. BREITHAUPT ON MARCH 4, 2013, AND FILED THE SAME DAY.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS Page 2 of 2