- 11 -
about the difficulties that would be encountered if partition
were attempted.
Courts, in approaching expert opinion evidence, are not
constrained to follow the opinion of any expert when the opinion
is contrary to the court’s own judgment. Courts may adopt or
reject expert testimony. Helvering v. Natl. Grocery Co., 304
U.S. 282, 295 (1938); Silverman v. Commissioner, 538 F.2d 927,
933 (2d Cir. 1976), affg. T.C. Memo. 1974-285. Valuation cases
are usually fact specific and are relied on by litigants and
courts for generalized guidance, but that do not establish bright
line rules for valuation; i.e., do not establish specific
percentage discounts to be applied under particular factual
circumstances.
Respondent’s position was that partition was a viable
alternative and that the cost of partition would be less than the
amount of the discounts claimed by the estates. Under
respondent’s position, a fractional interest could be purchased,
followed by partition resulting in value based on a fee interest.
The estates did not argue that partition and/or partition costs
should not play a role in the process of valuing partial
interests in property. Instead, at trial, the estates put on
evidence of the factual impediments to partition, such as:
Costs, delays in enjoyment of ownership, and legal problems. In
effect, the estates advanced evidence that resulted in our
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011