income indicator analysis (Oregon) · Go Syfert
← Oregon issues

income indicator analysis in Oregon

5 Oregon opinions name it 1 courts 2013–2017 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Oregon courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Benton County Assessorgreen
ortc · 2013 · cited in 2 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2013–2017
2 sentences

2017“Most importantly, the [highest and best use] affects what other properties may be considered comparable, a fundamentally important question when selecting so called ‘comparable’ sales and determining, where appropriate, which properties are selected for use in determination of elements of the income indicator analysis.” Hewlett-Packard Company v. Dept. of Rev., 21 OTR 186, 188 (2013), aff’d 357 Or 598 , 356 P3d 70 (2015).

2013Cite as 21 OTR 186 (2013) 189 Often there is little or no question that the cur- rent use of a property is the HBU.

12
Fred Meyer, Inc. v. Department of Revenuegreen
ortc · 1991 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013(Fred Meyer), 12 OTR 85, 88-89 (1991).4 “[T]he [highest and best use] affects what other properties may be considered comparable, a fundamentally important question when selecting so called ‘comparable’ sales and determining, where appropriate, which properties are selected for use in determination of elements of the income indicator analysis.” Hewlett-Packard Company v. Benton County Assessor, TC 4979, 2013 WL 1987281 at *2 (May 15, 2013).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Benton County Assessor green
or · 2015
2 sentences

2017“Most importantly, the [highest and best use] affects what other properties may be considered comparable, a fundamentally important question when selecting so called ‘comparable’ sales and determining, where appropriate, which properties are selected for use in determination of elements of the income indicator analysis.” Hewlett-Packard Company v. Dept. of Rev., 21 OTR 186, 188 (2013), aff’d 357 Or 598 , 356 P3d 70 (2015).

2017“Most importantly, the [highest and best use] affects what other properties may be considered comparable, a fundamentally important question when selecting so called ‘comparable’ sales and determining, where appropriate, which properties are selected for use in determination of elements of the income indicator analysis.” Hewlett-Packard Company v. Dept. of Rev., 21 OTR 186, 188 (2013), aff’d 357 Or 598 , 356 P3d 70 (2015).

12017–2017
STC Submarine, Inc. v. Department of Revenue green
or · 1995
1 sentence

2014“Often there is little or no question that the current use of a property is the [highest and best use.” Id.

12014–2014
Freedom Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Department of Revenue green
or · 1990
1 sentence

2013Highest and best use “affects what other properties may be considered comparable, a fundamentally important question when selecting so called ‘comparable’ sales and determining, where appropriate, which properties are selected for use in determination of elements of the income indicator analysis.” Id.

12013–2013

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.412 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.427 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.007 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.205 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 308.210 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check