Residents near a biomass power plant in Madison County, Georgia, owned and operated by the defendants, allege that the plant’s noise, vibrations, light, smoke, and soot are negatively impacting their property values. They have filed nuisance and negligence claims. The Defendants are challenging the admissibility of the Plaintiffs’ expert witness, real estate appraiser Kenneth Cantrell, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 702. While not disputing Cantrell’s qualifications, the Defendants argued that his appraisal, which assesses the decrease in property values due to plant noise, lacks sufficient factual basis and employs an unreliable methodology.
Real Estate Expert Witness
Kenneth Cantrell, a Georgia-based certified real estate appraiser, boasts a career spanning more than thirty years.
Cantrell possesses a robust educational background in real estate and finance, demonstrated by his successful completion of coursework covering essential areas such as real estate valuation, finance, law, brokerage, and investment analysis. Furthermore, he has consistently pursued advanced professional development, either completing or successfully challenging numerous courses offered by esteemed organizations like the Appraisal Institute (AI) and the Commercial Investment Real Estate Council (CI), underscoring his commitment to maintaining a high level of expertise.
Discussion by the Court
Real estate appraiser Kenneth Cantrell used the sales comparison approach to assess the impact of the biomass plant on the Plaintiffs’ property values, claiming his work adheres to the Appraisal Institute’s Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the Appraisal Institute’s Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
The Defendants challenged his methodology on three main points:
1) They argued he failed to properly verify sales data for comparable properties. The Plaintiffs countered that Cantrell’s associate verified the data, which is permissible.
2) The Defendants criticized the distance between comparable and appraised properties. The Plaintiffs responded that the rural setting justified the use of such comparables, under applicable appraisal standards.
3) The Defendants claimed Cantrell relied on a biased report about the Madison plant’s impact. However, the Court found Cantrell’s use of that study as a factor, to determine the size of the impacted area, was permissible.
The Court concluded that the Defendants’ criticisms pertain to the weight of Cantrell’s testimony, not its admissibility. Finding that Cantrell’s testimony is based on sufficient facts and reliable methodology, and would assist the jury, the Court denied the Defendants’ motion to exclude his testimony.
Held
The Court denied the Defendants’ motion to exclude Kenneth Cantrell’s testimony.
Key Takeaways:
- The Court recognized that in rural settings, broader geographic comparisons for real estate appraisals may be necessary and permissible, according to professional appraisal standards.
- Criticisms regarding the methodology, data verification, and comparable properties were deemed to affect the weight of the appraisal evidence, not its admissibility.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Fowler Et Al V. Georgia Renewable Power LLC Et Al |
| Docket Number: | 3:23cv62 |
| Court: | United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, Athens Division |
| Order Date: | March 15, 2025 |
Leave a Reply