Okla. Stat. » Title 68 — REVENUE AND TAXATION
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 68, § 2880.1 (2026)

Appeal of order of county equalization board to

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

district court - Notice of appeal - Appeal to Supreme Court - Legal counsel for assessor - Costs - Presumption of correctness of valuation. A. Both the taxpayer and the county assessor shall have the right of appeal from any order of the county board of equalization sustaining a valuation of real or personal property at a fair cash value as determined by the county assessor in excess of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00) to the Court of Tax Review, and right of appeal of either may be either upon questions of law or fact including value, or upon both questions of law and fact. Appeals from any other order of the county board of equalization shall be filed in the district court of the same county. The county assessor is the proper party defendant in any appeal to the district court or Court of Tax Review brought by the taxpayer. The taxpayer is the proper party defendant in any appeal to the district court or Court of Tax Review brought by the county assessor. In either case, the county board of equalization shall not be considered a party in any litigation from an appeal brought pursuant to this section. In case of appeal the trial in the district court or Court of Tax Review shall be de novo. Provided, the county assessor shall not be permitted to appeal an order of the county board of equalization upon a question of the constitutionality of a law upon which the board based its order, but the county assessor is hereby authorized in such instance to request a declaratory judgment to be rendered by the district court or Court of Tax Review in cases involving real or personal property with a fair cash value as determined by the county assessor in excess of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00). B. Notice of appeal shall be filed with the county clerk as secretary of the county board of equalization, which appeal shall be filed in the district court or Court of Tax Review, as the case may be, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date the board of equalization order was mailed, or in the event that the order was delivered, from the date of delivery. It shall be the duty of the county clerk to preserve all complaints and to make a record of all orders of the board and both the complaint and orders shall be a part of the record in any case appealed to the district court or Court of Tax Review from the county board of equalization. C. Either the taxpayer or the county assessor may appeal from the district court or Court of Tax Review to the Supreme Court, as

provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure, but no matter shall be reviewed on such appeal which was not presented to the district court or Court of Tax Review. D. In such appeals to the district court or Court of Tax Review and to the Supreme Court and in requests for declaratory judgment it shall be the duty of the district attorney to appear for and represent the county assessor. The General Counsel or an attorney for the Tax Commission may appear in such appeals or requests for declaratory judgment on behalf of the county assessor, either upon request of the district attorney for assistance, or upon request of the county assessor. It shall be the mandatory duty of the board of county commissioners and the county excise board to provide the necessary funds to enable the county assessor to pay the costs necessary to be incurred in perfecting appeals and requests for declaratory judgment made by the county assessor to the courts. E. In all appeals taken by the county assessor the presumption shall exist in favor of the correctness of the county assessor's valuation and the procedure followed by the county assessor. Added by Laws 1989, c. 321, § 17, operative Jan. 1, 1992. Amended by Laws 1998, c. 405, § 9; Laws 2015, c. 194, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2015; Laws 2019, c. 19, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 2019; Laws 2022, c. 349, § 2, eff. Jan. 1, 2023.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: In the Matter of the Assessments for Tax Year 2012 of Certain Props., 2021 OK 7 (Okla. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In the Matter of the Assessments for Tax Year 2012 of Certain Props., 2021 OK 7 (Okla. 2021). · cites it 15× “¶12 The county assessor argued an ad valorem tax protest appeal from a county board of equalization to a District Court is provided by 68 O.S. § 2880.1, 15 and then an appeal from a District Court to the Supreme Court.”
In Re the Assessment of Pers. Prop. Taxes Against Missouri Gas Energy, 2008 OK 94 (Okla. 2008). · cites it 2× “MGE filed a petition in the Woods County District Court on 26 June 2002, initiating an appeal from the Board's decision by trial de novo pursuant to the provisions of 68 O.S.2001 § 2880.1. [2] MGE's appeal challenged the assessment on both state- and federal-law grounds.”
In Re Amendments to Rules for Court of Tax Review, 2022 OK 99 (Okla. 2022). · cites it 9× “68 O.S.Supp.2022, §§ 2880.1, 3024(B)(1). 2.”
Visteon Corp. v. Yazel, 2004 OK CIV APP 52 (Okla. Civ. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “¶ 2 On June 11, 2002, Visteon filed its Petition in the trial court pursuant to 68 O.S.2001 § 2880.1 [2] (hereafter § 2880.”
Larry Jones Int'l Ministries, Inc. v. Means, 946 P.2d 669 (Okla. 1997). · cites it 2× “68 O.S.1991 § 2880.1(A). The time to appeal is also provided by § 2880.”
Missouri Gas Energy v. Grant Cnty. Assessor, 376 P.3d 923 (Okla. Civ. App. 2016). “The Grant County Assessor ("Assessor") and Appellee, Grant County Board of Equalization ("Board"), (collectively, "Ap-pellees"), each denied MGE's Freeport Application, MGE timely filed an appeal to the district court seeking review of the Appel-lees' denials pursuant to 68 O.S.…”
In Re the 2005 Tax Assessment of Real Prop. Owned by BMI Constr. Co., 2008 OK 7 (Okla. 2008). · cites it 2× “" [7] The terms of 68 O.S.2001 § 2880.1(A) give both the taxpayer and the county assessor the right to appeal from an order of the county board of equalization.”
Askins Props., L.L.C. v. Oklahoma Cnty. Assessor, 161 P.3d 303 (Okla. 2007). · cites it 2× “As allowed by 68 O.S.2001, § 2880.1(A), AP appealed the Board’s decision to the district court.”
Whig Syndicate, Inc. v. Keyes, 836 P.2d 1283 (Okla. 1992). “The proper procedure is now codified at 68 O.S.1991 § 2880.1.”
Matthews v. Funck, 155 P.3d 852 (Okla. Civ. App. 2007). “2 *854 STANDARD OF REVIEW T4 On appeal to the district court of an order of a county equalization board fixing the assessed valuation of property for ad valorem tax purposes, the trial court engages in a de movo review.”
Jackson v. Bd. of Equalization of Pushmataha Cnty., 892 P.2d 673 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “1991 § 322, with, 68 O.S.Supp.1992 § 2880.1. However, in the present case, the trial court clearly believed itself bound by the decision of the Board, so reciting in the journal entry of judgment and finding (1) Jackson did not meet his burden of proof before the Board, and (2)…”
Harvey v. Auto Plus of Woodward, 287 P.3d 410 (Okla. Civ. App. 2012). “68 O.S. § 2880.1(A). The any competent evidence standard of review applies to some decisions of the Court of Tax Review.”
Show all 30 citing cases →
— Okla. Stat. tit. 68, § 2880.1(A) — 9 cases
Larry Jones Int'l Ministries, Inc. v. Means, 946 P.2d 669 (Okla. 1997). “68 O.S.1991 § 2880.1(A). The time to appeal is also provided by § 2880.”
In Re the 2005 Tax Assessment of Real Prop. Owned by BMI Constr. Co., 2008 OK 7 (Okla. 2008). “" [7] The terms of 68 O.S.2001 § 2880.1(A) give both the taxpayer and the county assessor the right to appeal from an order of the county board of equalization.”
Harvey v. Auto Plus of Woodward, 287 P.3d 410 (Okla. Civ. App. 2012). “68 O.S. § 2880.1(A). The any competent evidence standard of review applies to some decisions of the Court of Tax Review.”
Askins Props., L.L.C. v. Oklahoma Cnty. Assessor, 161 P.3d 303 (Okla. 2007). “As allowed by 68 O.S.2001, § 2880.1(A), AP appealed the Board’s decision to the district court.”
Affordable Residential Communities 7, L.L.C. v. Canadian Cnty. Assessor, 150 P.3d 399 (Okla. Civ. App. 2006).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 68, § 2880.1(B) — 4 cases
In Re Amendments to Rules for Court of Tax Review, 2022 OK 99 (Okla. 2022). “68 O.S.Supp.2022, §§ 2880.1, 3024(B)(1). 2.”
Larry Jones Int'l Ministries, Inc. v. Means, 946 P.2d 669 (Okla. 1997). “68 O.S.1991 § 2880.1(A). The time to appeal is also provided by § 2880.”
In Re Amendment to Rule 3 of Rules for Court of Tax Review, 2023 OK 41 (Okla. 2023).
In Re Amendment to Rule 3 of Rules for Court of Tax Review, 2023 OK 41 (Okla. 2023).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 68, § 2880.1(C) — 1 case
Askins Props., L.L.C. v. Oklahoma Cnty. Assessor, 161 P.3d 303 (Okla. 2007). “As allowed by 68 O.S.2001, § 2880.1(A), AP appealed the Board’s decision to the district court.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 68, § 2880.1(D) — 2 cases
Yazel v. William K. Warren Med. Rsch. Ctr., 2014 OK 58 (Okla. 2014).
Yazel v. William K. Warren Med. Rsch. Ctr., Inc., 2014 OK 57 (Okla. 2014).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 68, § 2880.1(E) — 1 case
In Re the 2005 Tax Assessment of Real Prop. Owned by BMI Constr. Co., 2008 OK 7 (Okla. 2008). “" [7] The terms of 68 O.S.2001 § 2880.1(A) give both the taxpayer and the county assessor the right to appeal from an order of the county board of equalization.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.