ENTRY FORM

CALENDAR STATUS: Active
SC Number:
S059764
CA Number:
Case Title:
Comcast Corporation v. Department of Revenue
Date:
01/08/2013
Time:
01:30 PM
Location:
Supreme Court Courtroom
Attorneys:
Marilyn J. Harbur on behalf of Department of Revenue
Eric S. Tresh on behalf of Comcast Corporation
Comments:
Statement of Issues:
Comcast Corporation v. Department of Revenue (S059764) (direct review, pursuant to ORS 305.445, of a general judgment entered by the Oregon Tax Court).

This case comes before the Oregon Supreme Court on direct review of a general judgment entered by the Oregon Tax Court that: (1) set aside the department's actions in central assessment of Comcast's property for tax year 2009-2010; and (2) directed the Oregon Department of Revenue to issue an appropriate refund to Comcast.

The issues on direct review are as follows:

(1) For appellant:

(a) What kind of services are included in the definition of "communication" under ORS 308.505(2), and therefore subject to central assessment under ORS 308.515? Specifically, are cable television services "data transmission services" and therefore "communication" for purposes of ORS 308.505(2)?

(b) If either cable television or internet access services (but not both) are "communication" under ORS 308.505(2), and if Comcast uses property in both services, what is the primary use of that property and did the tax court err when it refused to remand the case to the department to decide that issue?

(c) If any of Comcast's property is centrally assessable, did the department properly calculate the Maximum Assessed Value (MAV) that property?

(2) For cross-appellant:

What kind of services are included in the definition of "communication" under ORS 308.505(2), and therefore subject to central assessment under ORS 308.515? Specifically, are internet access services "data transmission services" and therefore "communication" within the meaning of ORS 308.505(2)?

The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating:


Last Revised: 12/19/2012