Or. Rev. Stat. § 305.427

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the party seeking affirmative relief and requires a preponderance of the evidence.

Betz Evans Associates v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2012-10-04

“A preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *.” ORS 305.427. In this case, Plaintiff seeks relief and thus bears the burden of proof.

The party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proving its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Parker v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-10-08

The party seeking affirmative relief from this court bears the burden of proof and must establish his or her case by a “preponderance” of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

The party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

Kidd v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-10-24

As the party seeking affirmative relief, Plaintiffs have the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Frankel v. Multnomah County Assessor · filed 2012-10-24

The applicable burden of proof is “a preponderance of the evidence.”

The party seeking affirmative relief in tax court must prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Metzger v. Clatsop County Assessor · filed 2012-10-30

“In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *.” ORS 305.427 (2005). Plaintiff must establish his claim “by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence.”

Section 305.427 requires a party seeking affirmative relief in tax court to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Lioy-Ryan v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-11-19

Plaintiff must establish his claim “by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence.”

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the party seeking affirmative relief and requires a preponderance of the evidence.

Methvin v. Marion County Assessor · filed 2012-11-27

Plaintiffs‟ evidence is therefore not sufficient to meet the burden of proof required by ORS 305.427.

A party seeking affirmative relief in tax court must prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Whitney v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-11-30

“In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *.” ORS 305.427 (2011) (emphasis added). Plaintiff must establish its claim “by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence.” Schaefer v. Dept. of Rev., TC No 4530 at 4 (July 12, 2001) (citing Feves v. Dept. of Rev., 4 OTR 302 (1971)).

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the party seeking affirmative relief in tax court proceedings.

Werth Family LLC v. Yamhill County Assessor · filed 2012-12-12

In this case, Plaintiff, as the one seeking affirmative relief, bears the burden of proof.

A party seeking affirmative relief must prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Scappoose Smoke Shop v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-01-16

As the party seeking affirmative relief, Plaintiff bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the tax on its tobacco merchandise was paid. See ORS 305.427.

In the Tax Court, the party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proving its requested value by a preponderance of the evidence.

Pliska Investments LLC v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2013-01-31

In the Tax Court, the burden of proof falls “upon the party seeking affirmative relief.” ORS 305.427. That burden may be sustained by “a preponderance of the evidence,” that is, by “the more convincing or greater weight of evidence.” Id.; Feves v. Dept. of Revenue, 4 OTR 302, 312 (1971). Here, Plaintiff bears the burden to prove its requested RMV.

A party seeking affirmative relief in the Oregon Tax Court must prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Lakeview Farms, Ltd. v. Dept. of Rev. · filed 2013-04-12

In order to prevail before the Oregon Tax Court, a party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proving its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427. A “preponderance of the evidence” means that with regard to any factual question at issue in the case, the majority of the evidence in the record before the court must support the position taken by taxpayer on that question.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief in the Oregon Tax Court to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Barott v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-04-30

(the burden of proof in the Oregon Tax Court is a preponderance of the evidence and falls “upon the party seeking affirmative relief”).

The party seeking affirmative relief in tax court must prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Pacific National Developers, Inc v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-06-03

Plaintiffs must establish their claim “by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence.”

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence on the party seeking affirmative relief in the Oregon Tax Court.

Ostrom Company Inc. v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-06-07

The burden of proof in the Oregon Tax Court is a preponderance of the evidence and falls upon the party seeking affirmative relief.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief in a Tax Court appeal to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Shammel v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-07-31

When, as in this case, the dispute moves to the Tax Court, the party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proof and must establish his or her case by a “preponderance” of the evidence. ORS 305.427. The burden in this case falls, at least initially, on the Plaintiff, as he is the party seeking affirmative relief.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Oregon City BPOE 1189 v. Clackamas County Assessor · filed 2013-07-31

It was incumbent upon Plaintiff, as the party seeking affirmative relief, to establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence as required by ORS 305.427. To do that, the court needs reliable substantiation for items such as income and expenses in a case such as this, rather than the testimony of Plaintiff’s counsel.

The party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proving its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Kumbalek v. Multnomah County Assessor · filed 2013-09-05

As the party seeking affirmative relief, Plaintiff bears the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence. See ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires parties seeking affirmative relief to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Glasser v. Douglas County Assessor · filed 2013-12-03

As the parties seeking affirmative relief, Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. See ORS 305.427.

The party seeking affirmative relief must prove the material facts of its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Azar v. Dept. of Rev. · filed 2013-12-03

As the party seeking affirmative relief in this matter, taxpayer must prove the material facts of her case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the party seeking affirmative relief.

Dunzer v. Clatsop County Assessor · filed 2013-12-05

As the party seeking affirmative relief, Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the subject property’s real market value is incorrect on the tax roll. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence on the party seeking affirmative relief.

Wortley v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-12-09

As the party seeking affirmative relief, Plaintiffs have the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence on the party seeking affirmative relief.

Phoudavong v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-12-30

As the party seeking affirmative relief, Plaintiffs have the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the party seeking affirmative relief in Tax Court and requires proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

Nelson v. Department of Revenue · filed 2014-01-30

The burden of proof in the Tax Court is a “preponderance” of the evidence, and falls upon the party seeking affirmative relief which, in this case, is Plaintiff.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Williams v. Department of Revenue · filed 2014-02-10

The burden of proof in the Tax Court is a “preponderance of the evidence[,] [and] * * * fall[s] upon the party seeking affirmative relief” which, in this case, is Plaintiffs.

A party seeking affirmative relief in Tax Court must prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

O'Brien v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 080079c (or.tax 6-12-2008) · filed 2008-06-12

Plaintiff is the party seeking affirmative relief and he must therefore prove his case by a preponderance of the evidence.

In Tax Court magistrate proceedings, the party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proof, which a preponderance of the evidence satisfies.

Hand v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 090008d (or.tax 7-23-2009) · filed 2009-07-23

In proceedings before the magistrate of the Tax Court, "a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief." ORS 305.427 . Plaintiff carried the burden of proof.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief in the Tax Court to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Kudina v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 080038c (or.tax 11-17-2009) · filed 2009-11-17

When, as in this case, the dispute moves to the Tax Court, the party seeking affirmative relief bears the burden of proof and must establish his or her case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires a party seeking affirmative relief in Oregon Tax Court to prove the claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Emami v. Clackamas County Assessor, Tc-Md 080594d (or.tax 12-18-2009) · filed 2009-12-18

"In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief ." ORS 305.427 (emphasis added). Plaintiff must establish his claim "by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence."

The party seeking affirmative relief in tax court bears the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

Yamhill County Assessor v. Abrams, Tc-Md 090766d (or.tax 4-15-2010) · filed 2010-04-15

In the matter before the court, Plaintiff is "seeking affirmative relief" from the real market value determined by the Yamhill County Board of Property Appeals; thus, Plaintiff has the burden of proof. Unfortunately, that burden has not been met.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief in Oregon Tax Court proceedings to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Yamhill Cty. Assessor v. Abrams, Tc-Md 090729d (or.tax 4-15-2010) · filed 2010-04-15

"In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *. " ORS 305.427 (emphasis added). Plaintiff must establish its claim "by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence."

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief in Oregon Tax Court proceedings to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Yamhill Cty. Assessor v. Abrams, Tc-Md 090770d (or.tax 4-15-2010) · filed 2010-04-15

"In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *. " ORS 305.427 (emphasis added). Plaintiff must establish its claim "by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence."

The section requires the party seeking affirmative relief in a Tax Court proceeding to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Yamhill County Assessor v. Abrams, Tc-Md 090763d (or.tax 4-15-2010) · filed 2010-04-15

In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *.” ORS 305.427 (emphasis added). ... In the matter before the court, Plaintiff is "seeking affirmative relief" from the real market value determined by the Yamhill County Board of Property Appeals; thus, Plaintiff has the burden of proof. Unfortunately, that burden has not been met.

Section 305.427 requires a party seeking affirmative relief in Oregon Tax Court to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Yamhill County Assessor v. Abrams, Tc-Md 090751d (or.tax 4-15-2010) · filed 2010-04-15

"In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *." ORS 305.427 (emphasis added). ... In the matter before the court, Plaintiff is "seeking affirmative relief" from the real market value determined by the Yamhill County Board of Property Appeals; thus, Plaintiff has the burden of proof.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief in Tax Court to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Yamhill County Assessor v. Abrams, Tc-Md 090764d (or.tax 4-15-2010) · filed 2010-04-15

In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *.

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking affirmative relief in Tax Court proceedings to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Yamhill County Assessor v. Abrams, Tc-Md 090735d (or.tax 4-15-2010) · filed 2010-04-15

In all proceedings before the judge or a magistrate of the tax court and upon appeal therefrom, a preponderance of the evidence shall suffice to sustain the burden of proof. The burden of proof shall fall upon the party seeking affirmative relief * * *. " ORS 305.427 (emphasis added). Plaintiff must establish its claim "by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence."

A party bears the burden of proving a property tax value change it seeks from the value shown on the tax roll.

Level 3 Communications LLC III v. Dept. of Rev. · filed 2019-10-25

In this court, a party bears the burden of proof to the extent that the party seeks “affirmative relief.” See ORS 305.427. For both parties in this case, the benchmark to determine the extent of affirmative relief each party seeks is the RMV shown on the property tax roll.

Section 305.427 requires taxpayers to prove their claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Vandiver v. Deschutes Cty. Ass., Tc-Md 090584c (or.tax 10-1-2009) · filed 2009-10-01

Plaintiffs, by statute, have the burden of proof. ORS 305.427 . The statutory burden is a "preponderance" of the evidence. Id. Preponderance means the greater weight of evidence, the more convincing evidence."

Section 305.427 requires a taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Nielsen v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 081201b (or.tax 11-23-2009) · filed 2009-11-23

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish her case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. See ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires taxpayers to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Nguyen v. Clackamas County Assessor, Tc-Md 090348b (or.tax 11-24-2009) · filed 2009-11-24

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a "preponderance" of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires a taxpayer to prove her case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Dobra v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 090454b (or.tax 12-1-2009) · filed 2009-12-01

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish her case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. See ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Glorietta Bay LLC v. Benton Cty. Assr., Tc-Md 090030b (or.tax 2-18-2010) · filed 2010-02-18

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. See ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires a taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Willakenzie Evang. v. Lane Cty. Ass., Tc-Md 080932b (or.tax 2-18-2010) · filed 2010-02-18

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. See ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires a taxpayer to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Murray v. Tillamook County Assessor, Tc-Md 090154c (or.tax 2-19-2010) · filed 2010-02-19

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. ORS 305.427 . A "[p]reponderance of the evidence means the greater weight of evidence, the more convincing evidence."

ORS 305.427 requires plaintiffs to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Prestwood v. Deschutes County Assessor, Tc-Md 090589c (or.tax 2-26-2010) · filed 2010-02-26

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires taxpayers to establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Bothwell v. Multnomah County, Tc-Md 090867b (or.tax 3-10-2010) · filed 2010-03-10

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires plaintiffs to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Tomei v. Lincoln County Assessor, Tc-Md 090179c (or.tax 3-23-2010) · filed 2010-03-23

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. See ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires a taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Banducci v. Douglas County Assessor, Tc-Md 090069c (or.tax 9-23-2010) · filed 2010-09-23

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. See ORS 305.427.

ORS 305.427 requires the party seeking tax relief to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Lopez v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 100066b (or.tax 1-27-2011) · filed 2011-01-27

Because Plaintiff is unable to prove that she provided over one-half of the support of her claimed dependents for the year at issue, Plaintiff's appeal fails under ORS 305.427 (2007) (requiring that the party seeking affirmative relief must provide a "preponderance of the evidence * * * to sustain the burden of proof.").

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove its claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

Natl. Assoc. of Soc. v. Mult. Cty. Ass., Tc-Md 091589b (or.tax 1-28-2011) · filed 2011-01-28

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. See ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires plaintiffs to prove their tax appeal by a preponderance of the evidence.

Maitra v. Douglas County Assessor, Tc-Md 101052b (or.tax 4-1-2011) · filed 2011-04-01

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Gearin v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 100664c (or.tax 5-27-2011) · filed 2011-05-27

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427. During oral argument, Plaintiff stated that although the written agreement provides that he only had custody three days a week, actual custody was "about 50/50." That statement does not provide information sufficient enough to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Plaintiff maintained a household which constitutes his son's principle place of abode for more than one-half of the 2008 tax year.

Section 305.427 requires a taxpayer to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Lucas v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 100722b (or.tax 6-30-2011) · filed 2011-06-30

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires a taxpayer to establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Boring Dmcs. Gr. v. Clackamas Cty. Assr., Tc-Md 101150b (or.tax 7-13-2011) · filed 2011-07-13

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Clackamas County Assessor v. Poppert, Tc-Md 100374b (or.tax 8-12-2011) · filed 2011-08-12

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires plaintiffs to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence; unsupported factual allegations do not meet that standard.

Gray v. Multnomah County Assessor, Tc-Md 110232n (or.tax 8-24-2011) · filed 2011-08-24

Plaintiffs' factual allegations do not satisfy the preponderance of the evidence standard in ORS 305.427 and Plaintiffs' appeal must be denied.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

McKenzie Fence Co. v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc-Md 101272b (or.tax 11-30-2011) · filed 2011-11-30

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 requires the party seeking relief to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Halpin v. Clackamas County Assessor, Tc-Md 110186n (or.tax 12-9-2011) · filed 2011-12-09

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Pacific Cont. Bank v. Lane Cty. Asse., Tc-Md 110342 (or.tax 12-13-2011) · filed 2011-12-13

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Section 305.427 places the burden on the taxpayer to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence.

VanDerveer v. Wasco County Assessor · filed 2011-12-16

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427. ... Plaintiff did not present competent evidence of the 2010-11 exception value of the subject property. The court finds that there is no support for a reduction in the 2010-11 exception value of the subject property.

Section 305.427 requires taxpayers to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Hornsby v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2011-12-16

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Clackamas County Assessor v. Karge · filed 2012-01-09

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427. ... The court finds that Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the 2010-11 real market value of the subject property was $1,225,000.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Crawford v. Douglas County Assessor · filed 2012-01-26

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the taxpayer and requires proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

Sunstone Valley River LLC v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2012-02-09

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires plaintiffs in a tax appeal to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Serenity Lane v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2012-03-07

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Parks WestSac LLC v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2012-03-09

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden on the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

CLP Elements v. Benton County Assessor · filed 2012-03-22

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Palatine Investments v. Multnomah County Assessor · filed 2012-04-04

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the plaintiff and requires proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

Dinsdale v. Marion County Assessor · filed 2012-04-13

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires taxpayers to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Barlow v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-04-20

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a “preponderance” of the evidence. ORS 305.427. ... Because Plaintiffs have not satisfied the burden of proof, their appeal must be denied.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Andrews Foothills v. Multnomah County Assessor · filed 2012-04-25

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 places the burden on the plaintiff to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Xerox Corporation v. Clackamas County Assessor · filed 2012-06-29

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proving claimed unreimbursed employee business expenses on the taxpayers, who must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Robles v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-07-06

With respect to the claimed unreimbursed employee business expenses, Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden on taxpayers to prove their appeal by a preponderance of the evidence.

Garner v. Polk County Assessor · filed 2012-07-17

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Cascade Door/Window & Const. Co. v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-07-17

Plaintiff bears the burden of proof and must establish its case by a “preponderance” of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires plaintiffs in tax court to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Mohawk Valley Lions Club Foundation v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2012-07-24

The plaintiffs bear the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence in the tax court. See ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove his case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Helms v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-08-10

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Taxpayers must prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Kirwan v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-08-20

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Plaintiffs in a tax appeal must prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Miller v. Benton County Assessor · filed 2012-08-29

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. See ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden on plaintiffs to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Gloekler v. Multnomah County Assessor · filed 2012-09-12

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

McKenzie Fence v. Department of Revenue · filed 2012-10-09

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires taxpayers to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Wehde v. Jackson County Assessor · filed 2012-10-11

Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Grey v. Multnomah County Assessor · filed 2013-01-07

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove her tax appeal by a preponderance of the evidence.

Glasgow v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-05-10

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish her case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the taxpayer and requires proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

Cecil V. Stutzman Estate v. Yamhill County Assessor · filed 2013-06-21

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Section 305.427 requires the plaintiff to prove her case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Pir v. Marion County Assessor · filed 2013-07-01

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish her case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427. ... Plaintiff has not established by a preponderance of the evidence that her July 2012 purchase price of $145,000 was the subject property’s real market value as of January 1, 2012.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Electronics International Inc. v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-07-31

Plaintiff bears the burden of proof and must establish its case by a “preponderance” of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove her case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Studd v. Department of Revenue · filed 2013-08-23

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish her case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 requires the taxpayer to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence; inconclusive evidence does not meet that burden.

Van Buren v. Lane County Assessor · filed 2013-12-09

Plaintiff has the burden of proof and must establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Section 305.427 places the burden of proof on the appellant.

Multnomah County Assessor v. Chen · filed 2014-01-28

The county, as the appellant, bears the burden of proof. ORS 305.427. ... The court finds this evidence credible and persuasive and sufficient to satisfy the burden of proof borne by the county.