WHERE THERE IS A WIDE VARIANCE IN VALUATIONS AND GREAT DIFFERENCE IN EXPERT OPINION, A COMMISSIONER'S REPORT MUST CONTAIN SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO PERMIT INTELLIGENT JUDICIAL REVIEW

A VALUATION REPORT FILED BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF APPRAISAL CONSISTED PRIMARILY OF THE FINAL FIGURE FOR THE VALUE OF THE LAND TOGETHER WITH A STIPULATION THAT THE FIGURE APPLIED ONLY IF THE PROPERTY WAS UNENCUMBERED. THE STATUTE PRESCRIBING THE FORM OF THE APPRAISAL REPORT REQUIRES ONLY THAT THE REPORT BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE MINUTES OF ANY TESTIMONY AT HEARINGS HELD TO TAKE EVIDENCE ON THE APPRAISAL AND GIVES NO GUIDANCE AS TO THE FORMAT OF THE CONTENTS. THE SUPREME COURT, WHILE NOTING THE UNNECESSITY FOR A PARTICULARIZED FORMAT, CONCLUDED THAT CERTAIN MINIMUM STANDARDS RESPONSIVE TO PARTICULAR FACTS OF A GIVEN CASE AND CONTAINING ADEQUATE INFORMATION TO PERMIT A REVIEWING COURT TO RELATE THE COMMISSIONERS CONCLUSIONS TO BOTH THE ASSERTIONS OF THE PARTIES AND THE EVIDENCE AT THE HEARINGS, WERE NECESSARY. THE REPORT IN THE PRESENT CASE DID NEITHER AND THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF FAIR REVIEW WAS HIGHLIGHTED BY THE CLAIMANTS ASSERTION OF A PREEXISTING LEGAL NONCONFORMING INDUSTRIAL USE WHICH ALTERED THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. THE OWNER WAS ENTITLED TO EITHER A FAVORABLE FINDING OR SUFFICIENT NEGATIVE CONCLUSIONS ON WHICH TO FRAME AN APPEAL, BUT THE REPORT WAS SILENT ON THE ISSUE. THE CASE SERVES TO INDICATE THE MINIMUM CONTENT REQUIRED BY A COMMISSIONERS REPORT IN ORDER THAT IT MAY BE GIVEN HIGH PRESUMPTIVE VALIDITY AND THE NECESSITY FOR FACTUAL EVIDENCE, A LACK OF WHICH WOULD DEMAND FURTHER HEARINGS AND DOCUMENTATION.

  • Publication Date: 1969-2

Media Info

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00200865
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Report/Paper Numbers: Memo 199
  • Files: TRIS
  • Created Date: Jul 24 1973 12:00AM