What makes a report defensible
Reports fail under examination for a small number of recurring reasons, and almost none of them are about the final number.
- The intended use was vague, so the report gets attacked for being written for something else.
- The effective date was wrong or unexplained, which means the whole analysis answers a question nobody asked.
- The comparables were convenient rather than comparable, and the selection cannot be justified when someone asks why three better ones were passed over.
- The adjustments were rules of thumb. Asked where a figure came from, the honest answer turns out to be experience, which is not evidence.
- The scope of work was not disclosed, so what was and was not inspected becomes a live issue mid-testimony.
Getting those right is unglamorous and it is most of the job.
What an appraiser can and cannot promise
An appraiser can commit to methodology, to independence, to documentation, and to being available to explain the work. An appraiser cannot promise that a report will be admitted, that testimony will be allowed, or what weight either will carry.
Admissibility is decided by the court, on the record, in the specific matter. It depends on the issues in the case, the qualifications accepted, and rulings that have nothing to do with how carefully the appraisal was written. Any appraiser who guarantees otherwise is telling you something they have no ability to deliver, and that willingness to overstate is itself worth noting before you retain them.
The same applies to value. An appraiser who indicates what the number will be before the work is done has told you exactly what the report is worth.
Matters this work supports
Real property valuation comes up across a wide range of contested matters:
- Divorce and equitable distribution, where the effective date is frequently the point of dispute.
- Estate and probate disputes, including challenges to a date-of-death valuation.
- Partnership, LLC and co-ownership dissolution, where jointly held property has to be valued to be divided.
- Partition actions between co-owners who cannot agree.
- Bankruptcy proceedings, where the value of real property affects what is available to creditors.
- Damage and diminution-in-value claims, comparing value before and after an event.
- Appraisal review, where the question is whether another appraiser's work was competently done.
Some of these need a full appraisal. Some need a review. Some need a consulting engagement that will never become a report at all. Worth establishing which at intake.
What attorneys should settle before engaging
Assignments go wrong at intake far more often than in the analysis. Worth pinning down in writing at the outset:
- The effective date, and the basis for it.
- The intended use and every intended user. Adding a user afterwards is not a formality.
- Whether testimony is contemplated, so availability and scope are agreed rather than assumed.
- Whether this is an appraisal, a review, or a consultation. They are different assignment types with different standards.
- What access exists, since a retrospective valuation of a property that has since been sold or altered carries a heavier research burden.
- The timetable, working back from any disclosure deadline rather than forward from today.
