- 16 -
petitioner paid its escrow officers a commission of only 10
percent of the closing fee. Petitioner did not offer any
explanation for why its compensation system varied from the one
its expert advanced to opine on the reasonable compensation for
Kleindienst.
We can accept the general methodology of an expert and
reject that expert's ultimate conclusion if the record does not
support that conclusion. Rutter v. Commissioner, supra at 1274;
Barry v. United States, 501 F.2d 578, 581-583 (6th Cir. 1974).
In addition, we can decline to follow the opinion of an expert
witness if the opinion is contrary to our own judgment. Barry v.
United States, supra at 583.
Not only is Jones's formula inappropriate in this case, his
conclusion that he would pay Kleindienst more than $500,000 is
suspect for two reasons. First, Jones calculated the closing
commission based on the revenues produced from escrows that
Kleindienst solicited and not from fees generated from escrows
that she closed. Second, Jones stated that he did not pay the
sales commission to escrow officers who solicited and closed
their own escrows. Yet, Jones stated that he would be willing
to pay Kleindienst both the closing and sales commissions. A
more appropriate manner of compensation would be to pay
Kleindienst the sales commission only on those escrows that she
solicited but petitioner reassigned to other escrow officers to
close.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011