explaining that once the presumptive validity of the assessment *512 created by the taxing authority’s presentation of the assessment record into evidence has been rebutted by credible, relevant evidence introduced by the taxpayer, the taxing authority bears the risk of having the taxpayer’s evidence accepted by the court if it fails to offer additional countervailing evidence
How later courts described this case
- explaining that once the presumptive validity of the assessment *512 created by the taxing authority’s presentation of the assessment record into evidence has been rebutted by credible, relevant evidence introduced by the taxpayer, the taxing authority bears the risk of having the taxpayer’s evidence accepted by the court if it fails to offer additional countervailing evidence
- noting the fair market value is the actual value of the property, defined as the price a purchaser, willing but not obliged to buy, would pay an owner, willing but not obliged to sell
- holding that a property’s market value and assessment requires evidence
- “To preclude the trial court in a single-expert case from determining that the appropriate valuation lies somewhere between the official valuation and the inevitably lesser valuation offered by the taxpayer’s expert is to attribute to *366 the expert’s valuation a definitiveness that it does not automatically possess, and to limit unnecessarily the trial court’s ability to perform its legislatively designated role as factfinder.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ZAPPALA, Justice,
concurring.
I understand the majority opinion to hold that where the taxing authority has placed into evidence the official assessment record, and the taxpayer offers expert testimony of valuation, the trial court is not required to accept the expert testimony offered by the taxpayer in its entirety but may find the expert’s testimony credible in part. The court may thus decide on a fair market value which was not specifically offered by the expert so long as that decision is supported by evidence of record. Based on this understanding of the holding, I join in the majority opinion.