Section 13.33 Expert Testimony on the Value of Personal and Real Property

• Library: Sources of Proof (2014 Ed.)

A. (§13.33) Expert Testimony on the Value of Personal and Real Property

It is well settled that, under Missouri law, the lay opinions of the owner of a piece of property are admissible on the issue of the value of the property. Coffman v. Powell, 929 S.W.2d 309, 312 (Mo. App. S.D. 1996). Examples of testimony as to the value of personal property are wide and varied and include:

· the value of a vehicle before and after an accident, Schreiber v. Bradford, 754 S.W.2d 41 (Mo. App. E.D. 1988);

· the value of a statue in a divorce proceeding, Jones v. Jones, 661 S.W.2d 817 (Mo. App. E.D. 1983);

· the value of a bull, Freeman v. Lawson, 797 S.W.2d 882 (Mo. App. S.D. 1990);

· the value of embroidery, Sparks v. Daniels, 343 S.W.2d 661 (Mo. App. E.D. 1961);

· the rental value of equipment, Danley v. Estate of Smith, 539 S.W.2d 18 (Mo. App. W.D. 1976);

· the value of trees cut by a utility, Keener v. Black River Elec. Co-op., 469 S.W.2d 657 (Mo. App. E.D. 1971);

· the value of a leasehold interest in the condemnation context, State ex rel. State Highway Comm’n v. Samborski, 463 S.W.2d 896 (Mo. 1971);

· the present value of a pension fund, Jarvis v. Jarvis, 131 S.W.3d 894, 900 (Mo. App. W.D. 2004); and

· the extent original workmanship defects decrease the fair market value of a mobile home, McCutcheon v. Cape Mobile Home Mart, Inc., 796 S.W.2d 901, 906 (Mo. App. E.D. 1990).

The lay owner’s competence to testify as to value has been described as a presumption that may be rebutted by showing that the owner...