Section 23A

Citation: Section 23A
Parent Document: BLT Burger DC, LLC v. Norvin 1301 CT, LLC, 86 A.3d 1139 (2014)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 2014-03-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2656505/blt-burger-dc-llc-v-norvin-1301-ct-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,352 chars

28
          Id. at 1309 (discussing that “actual earning” may be “relevant evidence”
of future earning potential, “but it is the future potential, not the current earnings
themselves, that must constitute the legal basis for valuation”). Landlord argues
that Wolf is inapposite because it is a tax assessment case applying statutes and
regulations that are inapplicable here. We cannot agree. Wolf, citing standard
authority, see supra notes 26 and 27, relies on the generally accepted approach to
real estate, including valuation of leases. The fact that particular tax statutes and
regulations were applicable in Wolf does not undermine our analysis, as those
legislative edicts merely incorporate generally accepted valuation principles.
      29
         See id. Another method bases valuation on “comparable sales.” See id. at
1310-11. According to the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, an
appraiser typically “selects a final value estimate from among two or more
indications of value,” whereas Livingston relied on only one (income method). Id.
at 1307 (quoting THE APPRAISAL OF REAL ESTATE (8th ed. 1983) at 504).
      30
         Id. (quoting District of Columbia v. Washington Sheraton Corp., 499
A.2d 109, 115 (D.C. 1985) (internal quotation marks omitted)).
      31
           Id.
                                         26

Other Sections in This Document (499)

Full Text