Plaintiffs sought the partition and sale of a Boynton Beach property, a Miami property, and a West Palm Beach property (the “Properties”).
The Defendants sought to exclude the opinions, analysis, and testimony of George Smith, an expert witness retained by Plaintiffs to provide a Broker Opinion of Value with an opinion of market value for the Miami property at issue in this case.
Real Estate Expert Witness
With a decade of experience in commercial and industrial real estate, George Smith has established himself as a leading broker specializing in cold storage assets. Beginning his career in 2014, he closed over $55 million in industrial and office transactions within his first two years, focusing primarily on off-market investment opportunities across Florida and the
Southeast.
Discussion by the Court
Smith’s Qualifications
With regard to the Daubert analysis, the Lesters did not explicitly dispute Smith’s qualifications, other than to state that he is not a licensed appraiser and has no formal training in appraisal theory or in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
Reliability of Smith’s Methodology
Smith was retained as an expert to create a broker opinion of value “to present the client with an opinion of market value for an industrial cold storage facility . . . using completed leases, and sales as well as current listings as indicators.”
He explained at his deposition that he was not sure if most brokers used his exact methodology but testified that they should. Smith also testified at length about his experience and how it related to his methodology.
The Court noted that Smith is allegedly solely going to be testifying through deposition designations and will not be appearing live at the upcoming hearing.
Upon due consideration, the Court found that the deposition excerpts designated by Plaintiffs, in conjunction with Smith’s report, sufficiently clarified Smith’s methodology for the purpose of this Court’s Daubert analysis.
Held
The Court denied the Defendant’s motion in limine to exclude the opinions of George Smith.
Key Takeaway:
The Court is capable of determining at a bench hearing what weight, if any, to give Smith’s opinions. Further, to the extent they seek to discredit Smith’s opinions, the Defendants are free to question other witnesses about those opinions and/or to introduce other portions of his deposition.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Romade Asset Partners, L.P. Et Al V. Lester Et Al |
| Docket Number: | 9:22cv81914 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Order Date: | May 22, 2025 |
Leave a Reply