- 14 -
United States, 658 F.2d 999, 1005-1006 (5th Cir. 1981); Estate of
Newhouse v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 193, 218 (1990).
Fair market value is determined as of the valuation date,2
and no knowledge of unforeseeable future events that may affect
the value is imputed to the hypothetical persons. See, e.g.,
Estate of Newhouse v. Commissioner, supra at 218. Fair market
value equals the highest and best use of the property on the
valuation date. Fair market value takes into account special
uses that are realistically available due to the property's
adaptability to a particular business. Mitchell v. United
States, 267 U.S. 341, 344-345 (1925); Stanley Works v.
Commissioner, 87 T.C. 389, 400 (1986). Fair market value is not
necessarily affected by whether the owner has actually put the
property to its highest and best use. The reasonable and
objectively possible uses for the property control the valuation
thereof. United States v. Meadow Brook Club, 259 F.2d 41, 45
(2d Cir. 1958); Stanley Works v. Commissioner, supra at 400.
2 The parties have not set forth their positions concerning
the date as of which the Court should value the Property. We
value the Property as of Feb. 14, 1989; i.e., when the
commissioners filed their award with the State court. As stated
by the Minnesota Supreme Court, a condemnee is entitled to
compensation equal to the "damages assessed as of the date the
commissioners file their award and with respect to the value and
condition of the property at that time." Iowa Elec. Light &
Power Co. v. Fairmount, 67 N.W.2d 41, 46 (Minn. 1954); see also
In the Matter of Branch A-38, JT Ditch No. 204 v. County of
Martin, 406 N.W.2d 524, 525 (Minn. 1987); St. Louis Park v. Almor
Co., 313 N.W.2d 606, 609-610 (Minn. 1981).
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011