Porter v. Bicket

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that gross adjustments of 42% to 63% were incompatible to the subject property and not probative of its true value
• concluding that gross adjustments of 42% to 63% were incomparable to the subject property and not probative of its true value
• finding that adjustments of 22% to 63% were incompatible to the subject property and not probative of its true value
• “land-to-building ratio which appears to be in excess of the land-to-building ratios prevailing in the subject’s market area is not necessarily indicative of excess land”
• “warehouses are commonly rented by their owners as investment property,” therefore “the income approach is a viable method of valuing them”
• “The magnitude of these adjustments vitiates comparability.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).