2019 Ohio 3807
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Parties divorced; Husband (plastic surgeon) owned the business real estate (the "PSE property") that housed his practices across from Bethesda North Hospital.
- In Nov. 2016 the parties jointly hired commercial appraiser Eric Gardner to value the PSE property for settlement; Gardner classified it as a surgical center and used sales-comparison and income-capitalization approaches to value it at $1,210,000 (less mortgage).
- Husband offered an earlier (2015) appraisal by Shaun Wilkins at trial, which classified the building as a medical-office building and valued it at $872,000 (less mortgage) using a higher cap rate.
- The magistrate and domestic-relations court credited Gardner’s joint appraisal, discounted Wilkins’s 2015 appraisal (not timely shared with Gardner and not accounting for actual rental practices), and fixed the PSE-property value at $863,598 (after mortgage adjustments).
- Husband appealed, arguing the trial court erred in valuing the property; the court reviewed the weight of the evidence and affirmed the valuation and property division.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Wife) | Defendant's Argument (Husband) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in valuing the PSE property and abused its discretion in adopting Gardner’s appraisal over Wilkins’s | Gardner’s jointly retained, more current appraisal is reliable and entitled to weight; court properly adopted it | Wilkins’s appraisal is more accurate: building is a medical-office (not surgery center); Gardner relied on inappropriate comparables and too-low cap rate; Wilkins’s higher cap rate and comparables better reflect risk | Court held the adoption of Gardner’s appraisal was not against the manifest weight of the evidence; magistrate/court could credit the jointly retained, disinterested appraiser and discount Wilkins’s older appraisal; no abuse of discretion in the property division |
Key Cases Cited
- Thomas v. Thomas, 870 N.E.2d 263 (1st Dist. 2007) (equitable-division review is for abuse of discretion)
- Middendorf v. Middendorf, 696 N.E.2d 575 (Ohio 1998) (same)
- Sieber v. Sieber, 37 N.E.3d 776 (12th Dist. 2015) (valuation of marital property is a factual issue)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 972 N.E.2d 517 (Ohio 2012) (standards for weighing evidence in civil cases post-Eastley)
- State v. Thompkins, 678 N.E.2d 541 (Ohio 1997) (weight-of-the-evidence standard for reversal)