- 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 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011