- 18 -
The fair market value of property on a particular date is a
factual question and requires consideration and weighing of all
relevant evidence in the record. Orth v. Commissioner, 813 F.2d
837, 842 (7th Cir. 1987), affg. Lio v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 56
(1985); Mauldin v. Commissioner, 60 T.C. 749, 759 (1973); Kaplan
v. Commissioner, 43 T.C. 663, 665 (1965). The determination of
the value of property is a matter of judgment rather than of
mathematics. Hamm v. Commissioner, 325 F.2d 934, 940 (8th Cir.
1963), affg. T.C. Memo. 1961-347. Since valuation is necessarily
an approximation, it is not required that the value we determine
be one as to which there is specific evidence, provided that it
is within the range of figures that properly may be deduced from
the record. Silverman v. Commissioner, 538 F.2d 927, 933 (2d
Cir. 1976), affg. T.C. Memo. 1974-285; Hamm v. Commissioner,
supra at 939-940.
Expert opinion is admissible if it will assist the trier of
fact to understand evidence that will determine the fact in
issue. See Fed. R. Evid. 702. The trier of fact must weigh such
evidence in light of the demonstrated qualifications of the
expert and all other credible evidence. Estate of Christ v.
Commissioner, 480 F.2d 171, 174 (9th Cir. 1973), affg. 54 T.C.
493 (1970); IT&S of Iowa, Inc. v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 496, 508
(1991); Parker v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 547, 561 (1986). The
persuasiveness of an expert's conclusion depends largely upon the
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011