- 12 -
opinions are used to aid the Court in understanding an area
requiring specialized training, knowledge, or judgment. As the
trier of fact, we are not bound, however, by the experts'
opinions. See Silverman v. Commissioner, 538 F.2d 927, 933 (2d
Cir. 1976), affg. T.C. Memo. 1974-285; Chiu v. Commissioner, 84
T.C. 722, 734 (1985). One expert may be persuasive on one
particular element of valuation while another expert may provide
more incisive help on some other element of valuation. See
Parker v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 547, 561-562 (1986).
Consequently, using our best judgment, we may adopt some portions
and reject other portions of expert testimony. See Helvering v.
National Grocery Co., 304 U.S. 282 (1938).
1. Petitioner's Expert Witness
a. Qualifications
Petitioner's expert, N. Clark Wheeler (Wheeler), has been
actively engaged in the appraisal field for 20 years. Wheeler is
8(...continued)
property with the fair market value of the same property as if it
was unencumbered by a conservation easement. The fair market
value of the property in its encumbered state was divided by the
estimated fair market value of the property in its unencumbered
state to derive a diminution percentage attributable to the
conservation easement involved in the comparison.
The analysis of paired sales involved a comparison of the
fair market value of easement-encumbered property with the fair
market value of unencumbered property in the same general area.
The fair market value of the encumbered property was divided by
the fair market value of the unencumbered property to derive a
diminution percentage attributable to the conservation easement
involved in the comparison.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011