Online Legal Resources for Appraisers
By Peter Christensen
This article originally appeared in, and is reprinted from, the Right of Way Magazine (July/August 2017 issue). © 2017 by the International Right of Way Association. Archives of Right of Way magazine, including Peter's past columns, are available at http://www.rightofwaymagazine-digital.org
Researching legal decisions is easier and more accessible than ever
Appraisers who provide right of way services often pose interesting legal questions. For
instance, an appraiser hired as an expert
witness for a landowner might ask, “Are there
any recent cases about appraisal opinions for
condemnation based on surveys of public
reaction to property conditions—like a
pipeline running under a property?” And
sometimes the questions are about more
everyday concerns: “Is an employee appraiser
in my firm exempt from overtime pay?”
UNTIL
RECENTLY,
RESEARCHING
LEGAL
DECISIONS
WAS
SOMETHING
ONLY DONE
BY LAWYERS,
PARALEGALS
AND LAW
LIBRARIANS...
Indeed, there are useful cases that address
these kinds of questions—and virtually
every other legal topic. But how do you find
them—for free? Until recently, researching
legal decisions was something only done by
lawyers, paralegals and law librarians using
expensive databases like Westlaw, Lexis or
arcane legal research books. The internet,
of course, has changed everything. While
Westlaw and Lexis remain a key part of a
lawyer’s toolkit and provide deep resources
for a price, alternative online tools are now
available for everyone to use.
In my work, I have found three excellent—
and free—legal research sites that appraisers,
particularly those practicing in the right of
way field, may find useful.
Google Scholar
(http://scholar.google.com/)
Google Scholar is more than a
legal database. First released in
2004, it indexes more than 150
million academic books, articles,
conference papers and other
scholarly literature. Its legal database
is equally encompassing and gives
users access to virtually every
published federal district court, tax
and appellate decision since 1923 and
state appellate cases since 1950. The
key feature for non-lawyers (and for
some lawyers too) is that searches are
made using plain English. Another
useful feature is that it can show
whether a case you’re looking at
has been cited by other cases. So if
you’ve just found an interesting case
about the use of survey information
by expert witnesses, you can see if
other judges have cited that case and
discussed the concept as well.
How might the right of way
appraiser with the question about
appraisal testimony based on survey
information use Google Scholar? In
this situation, let’s say he’s been hired
by a rural property owner’s attorney
in a case involving a gas pipeline
easement. Part of his assignment is
to determine severance damages to
the remaining property after the take.
He’s wondering if he can conduct
a telephone survey of people in the
area to determine their perceptions
of the impact on value of a pipeline
running under or near a property.
Or perhaps he can rely on existing
surveys conducted by academics. In
Google Scholar, he can run a search
for “telephone survey, appraiser,
expert witness and condemnation”
and the results will include about 20
potentially relevant cases. Reading
several of the cases will likely impact
the decision to develop valuation
opinions based on survey data.
The search results will include
cases that have considered the use
of telephone surveys as a basis for
severance damages. In one such case, Hoekstra v. Guardian Pipeline,
LLC, a Wisconsin appellate court
considered a trial court’s decision to
exclude appraisal expert testimony
based on survey information.
The trial court had ruled such
testimony was not permissible
because comparable sales data
existed, but the appellate court
reversed holding that the appraisers
properly could rely on surveys in
developing their opinions, provided
that they establish a nexus between
the survey results and the specific
subject property.
Another case that turns up in
the result is Exxon Mobil Corp.
v. Albright, which was decided
under Maryland law but was not
a condemnation case. Instead, it
considered appraisal testimony
relating to the valuation of
properties affected by gas leaks
from underground storage tanks.
In this case, the Maryland appellate
court reached the opposite
result as the appellate court in
Wisconsin, ruling that valuation
testimony based on a survey was
not admissible (and reversing a
$1.5 billion trial verdict) because
comparable sales information
was actually available to the
appraiser. The Maryland court
offered the following instruction
that appraisers relying on surveys
should consider:
[A] real estate appraisal expert
must proffer a reasonable
justification for ignoring market
data where it is available. Here,
there was ample actual market
data from which a valuation
opinion (baseline or otherwise)
could have been made, had [the
landowner’s appraisal expert]
chosen to use it. . . . to discard
market data, [the landowner’s
appraisal expert] had to provide
a reasonable justification
explaining the unsuitability or
unreliability of the comparable
sales data.
So, the bottom line is that the door
may be open to survey evidence
but it’s a door that must be opened
carefully. It’s likely a subject that
merits a discussion with the
attorney who hired the appraiser
before proceeding too far so that
the attorney can determine specific
admissibility and probative value
in the state in which the property is
located.
Justia Dockets
(https://dockets.justia.com/)
Founded by two Harvard Law
School JDs, the high-tech company
behind the Justia Dockets site is
idealistic. They seek to “advance
the availability of legal resources
for the benefit of society.” It’s
a profit-making company that
earns revenue by providing online
marketing for law firms. Justia
Dockets enables users to search
recent federal court filings by party
name, case type, date range and
jurisdiction—and it’s updated daily
with new case filings.
Since the site allows users to search
by both partial party name and case
type, it is a useful tool for finding
cases involving specific subject
matters. For example, by searching
for “pipeline” as part of a party
name and for a case type of “land
condemnation,” I found 20 federal
condemnation cases filed this year
involving pipeline companies.
The appraiser/firm owner with the
question about whether an employee
appraiser in her firm was exempt from
overtime might do a search in Justia
Dockets for a partial party name of
“appraisal” and for a “labor” case type.
That search would yield a case entitled
Boyd, et al., v. Bank of America, et
al., in which a Central District of
California judge wrote an extensive
opinion explaining that staff-level
appraisers (residential appraisers in
the case at hand) were not exempt
from overtime. The case ultimately
resolved in a $36 million overtime
settlement in favor the staff appraisers
employed by Bank of America’s
subsidiary Landsafe Appraisal.
Georgetown Law Library’s Research Guides
(http://www.law.georgetown.edu/library/)
For researching the law of a particular state or jurisdiction, the Georgetown Law online guide may be the best place to start.
Finally, the scope of legal research
regarding the case and statutory law
of our federal and state legal systems
is so vast that there are research
guides about research resources. In
my opinion, if you need to research
the law of a particular state or
jurisdiction and don’t quite know
where to start, your best guide to
finding out what’s out there is the
online research guide created by the
Georgetown Law. On this site, you’ll
find a state-by-state presentation of
the different legal research resources
available to find applicable cases or
statutes within a specific state.
Overcoming the Challenges
Right of way professionals work in a
field filled with interesting situations
and challenging legal problems.
Today, it is easier than ever to access
free legal research resources that
may help lead you to some viable
solutions, or at least, to some rather
interesting reading.
References
Hoekstra v. Guardian Pipeline, LLC,
2006 WI App 245, 298 Wis. 2d 155, 726
N.W.2d 648.
Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Albright, 71 A.3d
30 (Md. Ct. of Appeals 2013).
This article originally appeared in, and is reprinted from, the Right of Way Magazine (July/August 2017 issue). © 2017 by the International Right of Way Association. Archives of Right of Way magazine, including Peter's past columns, are available at http://www.rightofwaymagazine-digital.org