Potwin v. Multnomah County Assessor

• Court: Oregon Tax Court
• Decided: October 6, 2015
• Docket: TC-MD 150205C
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE OREGON TAX COURT MAGISTRATE DIVISION Property Tax

PETER V. POTWIN ) and CYNTHIA POTWIN, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) TC-MD 150205C ) v. ) ) MULTNOMAH COUNTY ASSESSOR, ) ) CORRECTED FINAL DECISION OF Defendant. ) DISMISSAL

This Corrected Final Decision of Dismissal incorporates without change the court’s

Decision of Dismissal, signed by Magistrate Robinson and entered on September 2, 2015.1 The

court did not receive a statement of costs and disbursements within 14 days after its Decision of

Dismissal was entered. See TCR-MD 16 C(1).

This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs’ motion to withdraw their appeal, filed on

August 19, 2015. Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on April 8, 2015, challenging the real market

value of property identified as Account R148754 (subject property) for the 2014-15 tax year.

(Ptfs’ Compl at 1.) At a case management conference held by the court on June 1, 2015,

Plaintiffs agreed to allow Defendant to inspect the subject property. On June 13, 2015,

Defendant filed a Motion for Discovery stating that Plaintiffs had “verbally denied the

inspection” and requesting an Order granting a site inspection. (Def’s Mot Disc at 1-2.)

Plaintiffs timely responded to Defendant’s request for site inspection, asking the court to deny

///

1 The court issued this Corrected Final Decision of Dismissal to correct clerical errors. The court’s prior Final Decision of Dismissal contained an incorrect date in the appeal rights and referred to the court’s “Decision,” rather than “Decision of Dismissal.”

CORRECTED FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150205C 1 the request because Defendant had previously inspected the subject property in early January.

(Ptfs’ Reply at 1.) On July 30, 2015, the court issued an Order Granting Site Inspection (Order),

permitting Defendant to inspect the subject property. (Order at 2.)

There is no rule precluding multiple inspections of a property. And, in this case, the

January inspection was done by Defendant in preparation for Plaintiffs’ February 17, 2015,

hearing before the Multnomah County Board of Property Tax Appeals (BOPTA). (See Ptfs’

Compl at 2, 4.) This court has previously noted that inspection of the subject property should be

allowed where it is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.”

Poddar v. Dept. of Rev., 328 Or 552, 532, 983 P2d 527 (1999). Inspection of the subject

property is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of evidence relating to the real market

value of the subject property.

On August 17, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to compel a site inspection, stating that it

had made numerous attempts to organize a site inspection, with no response from Plaintiffs. On

August 19, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a motion to withdraw stating that “[the fact that] county is

allowed a second inspection [] leads me to believe that I will not be playing on a level play field

and [that] going to trial will be a waste of time and effort * * *. I [am] dropping my case against

Multnomah [C ]ounty.” The court interprets this to mean that Plaintiffs no longer wish to pursue

this appeal.

After considering the matter, the court finds Plaintiffs’ case should be dismissed.

Defendant has not filed a counterclaim. Because the case is dismissed, the court’s Order

Granting Site Inspection, dated July 30, 2015, is moot. Now, therefore,

IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that Plaintiffs’ Complaint is dismissed.

CORRECTED FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150205C 2 IT IS FURTHER THE DECISION OF THIS COURT that the Order Granting Site

Inspection, dated July 30, 2015, is moot.

Dated this day of October, 2015.

ALLISON R. BOOMER MAGISTRATE

If you want to appeal this Final Decision of Dismissal, 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 Final Decision of Dismissal or this Final Decision of Dismissal cannot be changed. TCR-MD 19 B.

This document was filed and entered on October 6, 2015.

CORRECTED FINAL DECISION OF DISMISSAL TC-MD 150205C 3