W. Pendarvis Global Land & CCD, LLC, et al. v. Dept. of Rev.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TC 5496 	Page 1 of 2
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT
REGULAR DIVISION
Property Tax
W. PENDARVIS GLOBAL LAND &
CCD, LLC, ET AL.,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
State of Oregon,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
TC 5496
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
This matter is before the court on its own motion due to Plaintiff’s failure to appear at a
scheduled case management hearing.
The court held an initial case management hearing on Monday, February 23, 2026, at
11:00 a.m. by remote means (Webex). Plaintiff’s counsel, Michael J. Mangan, reported that he
intended to leave the firm Vorys Sater Seymour and Pease LLP by the end of the week, and he
requested 30 days’ time to determine whether Plaintiff would continue to engage his services.
Without objection, on the record, the court ordered a second case management hearing to be set
30 days hence and adjourned the hearing. A few minutes thereafter, court staff issued a Notice
of Scheduled Court Proceeding setting the second case management hearing for March 27, 2026,
at 11:00 a.m. Court records show that the notice was sent by email to each attorney of record,
including to Mangan at mmangan@vorys.com at 11:14 a.m. on February 23, 2026. Court
records indicate that the email was retrieved by counsel for Defendant but not by Mangan.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TC 5496 	Page 2 of 2
The notice of the March 27, 2026, hearing states that the hearing was to proceed by
Webex using a link provided in the notice. The notice states:
“IF YOU DO NOT APPEAR, YOUR CASE MAY BE DISMISSED OR A DECISION
MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU”
Mangan failed to appear at the March 27, 2026, case management hearing. No other
person appeared for Plaintiff. Two counsel for Defendant, as well as an employee of Defendant,
joined before the 11:00 a.m. start time. At 11:05 a.m., the court commenced the hearing for the
purpose of asking counsel for Defendant whether they had heard from Mangan. They reported
that they had not. The court adjourned the hearing.
The court finds that Mangan remains the attorney of record for Plaintiff in this matter.
The court has received no communication from Mangan, or any communication on behalf of
Plaintiff, since the first case management hearing on February 23, 2026. Now, therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff will file a response to this order on or before April 6,
2026. If Plaintiff wishes to pursue this appeal, the response must explain why Plaintiff did not
attend the March 27, 2026, case management hearing. If Plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue the
appeal, Plaintiff is directed to file a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Tax Court Rule
(TCR) 54 A(1). If Plaintiff fails to respond to this order, the court will dismiss the complaint
pursuant to TCR 54 B(1).
Dated this 27th day of March, 2026.