Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: BC723226, Date: 2023-03-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC723226    Hearing Date: March 15, 2023    Dept: 52

Plaintiff Bruce J. Guttman’s Motion for Leave to Call Expert Stephen D. Roach as a Rebuttal Witness

Plaintiff Bruce J. Guttman moves for leave to call an expert as a rebuttal witness at the final valuation hearing on May 16, 2023.  The valuation hearing is necessary “to ascertain and fix the fair market value of the partnership interests owned by the moving parties.”  (Corp. Code, § 15908.02(c).)  “The court shall appoint three disinterested appraisers to appraise the fair market value of the partnership interests owned by the moving parties, and shall make an order referring the matter to the appraisers so appointed for the purpose of ascertaining that value.  The order shall prescribe the time and manner of producing evidence, if evidence is required.  The award of the appraisers or a majority of them, when confirmed by the court, shall be final and conclusive upon all parties.”  (Id., subd. (d).)

In 2019, the parties stipulated to three disinterested appraisers whom the court appointed.  (Stein Decl., ¶ 6.)  The appraisers’ reports were lodged with the court on December 2, 2019.  Over three years later, plaintiff moves for leave to present testimony from Stephen D. Roach as to why the three appointed appraisers erred.  Plaintiff fails to show that any of these appraisals is erroneous or that Roach’s testimony is otherwise necessary or appropriate.    

Plaintiff’s motion relies on greatly exaggerating the magnitude of the differences between the three appraisals.  Plaintiff argues, “[T]here is an astounding $1,857,000 variance between the lowest Appraisal (presented by Zoraster) and the highest Appraisal (presented by Gribin) for the overall value of the Properties.”  (Motion, p. 12.)  Plaintiff further argues, “Given the gaping seven-figure disparity between the Appraisals, one, two, or all three of them must be erroneous.”  (Reply, p. 2.) 

The appraisals are $37,180,000, $38,300,000, and $39,037,000.  The $1,857,000 difference between the highest and lowest appraisals is about five percent of the smallest appraisal or 4.8 percent of the largest appraisal.  That is not an “astounding” or “gaping” disparity.  To the contrary, the appraisals are remarkably similar.  “[P]roperty appraisal is not an exact science.”  (Eastern Municipal Water Dist. v. Superior Court (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1245, 1251.)  That three independent, qualified, and neutral experts reached valuations with a range of less than five percent strongly shows that none of the appraisals is erroneous.

The motion is denied.