Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.420

Issuance of subpoenas; administration of oaths; depositions

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      305.420 Issuance of subpoenas; administration of oaths; depositions. (1) The judge, a magistrate or the clerk of the tax court, on the request of any party to the proceeding, or the attorney of the party, shall issue subpoenas requiring the attendance of and the giving of testimony by witnesses, and subpoenas duces tecum requiring the production of any returns, books, papers, documents, correspondence and other evidence pertaining to the matter under inquiry at any designated place of hearing in the manner prescribed by law in civil actions in courts of this state.

      (2) Any employee of the court designated in writing for the purpose by the judge may administer oaths.

      (3) Any party to the proceeding may cause the depositions of witnesses residing within or without the state to be taken in the manner prescribed by law for like depositions in civil actions in courts of this state. To that end, the party may compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of returns, books, papers, documents, correspondence and other evidence pertaining to the matter under inquiry.

      (4) Subject to ORS 305.390 and 305.392, subpoenas in a proceeding involving the determination of the value of an industrial plant, as defined in ORS 308.408, for purposes of ad valorem property taxation, may be issued as provided in subsection (1) of this section. However, upon petition of the person subpoenaed, the court shall make an order determining if the evidence sought by the subpoena is relevant to the pending proceeding and, if requested by the person subpoenaed, an order as required in the interests of justice to protect the confidentiality of the information subpoenaed. [1961 c.533 §17; 1963 c.304 §1; 1981 c.139 §5; 1993 c.353 §6; 1995 c.650 §18; 2003 c.46 §5; 2005 c.345 §6]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1986–2013 · leading case: Department of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Department of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp. (1991) or “430(4) applies, because, at this point, it is one on the department’s administrative subpoena rather than a tax court subpoena in a litigation proceeding to value an industrial plant in Oregon under ORS 305.420(5) or as covered by ORS 308.411(4).”
SIMPLOT CO. v. Dept. of Rev. (1995) or “At the request of the owner, the information shall be made the confidential records of the office of the assessor or of the department, subject to the provisions of ORS 305.420 and 305.430. "(5) If an owner makes an election under subsection (2) of this section, the owner shall…”
Department of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp. (1993) or “Failure to obey any order issued by the court under this section is contempt of court. The remedy provided by this section shall be in addition to other remedies, civil or criminal, existing under the tax laws or other laws of this state.”
Union Pacific Railroad v. Department of Revenue (1986) ortc “411 (4) or by court order under ORS 305.420(5), and is introduced into evidence in any hearing before the tax court, the court first shall make such order or orders as are necessary to protect the confidentiality of the information.”
Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (1990) ortc “190 are subject to the court’s review under ORS 305.420(5). In that review, the court considers the provisions of ORS 305.”
Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (1990) ortc · cites it 5× “420(5) authorizes the court to review subpoenas for relevancy and to determine what protection to give confidential information. That statute applies only to subpoenas in a “proceeding involving the determination of the value of an industrial plant.”
J. R. Simplot Co. v. Department of Revenue (1995) or “At the request of the owner, the information shall be made the confidential records of the office of the assessor or of the department, subject to the provisions of ORS 305.420 and 305.430. “ (5) If an owner makes an election under subsection (2) of this section, the owner shall…”
Wihtol v. Multnomah County Assessor (2013) ortc “ORS 305.420(1); ORS 305.427; ORS 305.430(1).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.420(1) — 1 case
Wihtol v. Multnomah County Assessor (2013) ortc “ORS 305.420(1); ORS 305.427; ORS 305.430(1).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.420(5) — 5 cases
Department of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp. (1991) or “430(4) applies, because, at this point, it is one on the department’s administrative subpoena rather than a tax court subpoena in a litigation proceeding to value an industrial plant in Oregon under ORS 305.420(5) or as covered by ORS 308.411(4).”
Department of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp. (1993) or “Failure to obey any order issued by the court under this section is contempt of court. The remedy provided by this section shall be in addition to other remedies, civil or criminal, existing under the tax laws or other laws of this state.”
Union Pacific Railroad v. Department of Revenue (1986) ortc “411 (4) or by court order under ORS 305.420(5), and is introduced into evidence in any hearing before the tax court, the court first shall make such order or orders as are necessary to protect the confidentiality of the information.”
Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (1990) ortc “190 are subject to the court’s review under ORS 305.420(5). In that review, the court considers the provisions of ORS 305.”
Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Department of Revenue (1990) ortc “420(5) authorizes the court to review subpoenas for relevancy and to determine what protection to give confidential information. That statute applies only to subpoenas in a “proceeding involving the determination of the value of an industrial plant.”
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.