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
Dep't of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp., 815 P.2d 1237 (Or. 1991).
“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., 897 P.2d 316 (Or. 1995).
“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…”
Dep't of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp., 862 P.2d 1288 (Or. 1993).
“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 Pac. R.R. v. Dep't of Revenue, 10 Or. Tax 235 (Or. T.C. 1986).
“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. Dep't of Revenue, 11 Or. Tax 448 (Or. T.C. 1990).
“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. Dep't of Revenue, 11 Or. Tax 355 (Or. T.C. 1990).
· 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. Dep't of Revenue, 897 P.2d 316 (Or. 1995).
“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…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.420(1) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.420(5) — 5 cases
Dep't of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp., 815 P.2d 1237 (Or. 1991).
“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).”
Dep't of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp., 862 P.2d 1288 (Or. 1993).
“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 Pac. R.R. v. Dep't of Revenue, 10 Or. Tax 235 (Or. T.C. 1986).
“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. Dep't of Revenue, 11 Or. Tax 448 (Or. T.C. 1990).
“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. Dep't of Revenue, 11 Or. Tax 355 (Or. T.C. 1990).
“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.