Printer Friendly

Property's use and classification may be considered in property valuation. (Cases in Brief).

A property's use and classification may be considered in its valuation, according to a decision of the Supreme Court of Minnesota.

In 1975, Michael Weed purchased an old house on three acres of land along a branch of a river for $1,000. The house, which Weed restored and eventually made his home, is serviced by a well and septic system. Access to the property is by permanent easement. In 1983, the local township vacated a township road that provided access to the property. In exchange for a permanent easement over neighboring land, Weed agreed not to sue the township for any loss of value to his property resulting from vacation of the road. Weed currently accesses his property by a bridge that he built over the river. For tax purposes, two of Weed's acres are classified agricultural and one acre, the home site, is classified agricultural homestead. The assessor valued the agricultural acres at $450 each, which Weed did not contest. He did, however, contest the $8,000 valuation of the agricultural homestead land. The tax court upheld the valuation relying heavily on the sales comparison approach. Weed appealed.

On appeal, Weed argued that the tax court erred by considering use and classification of the subject property to estimate its value. The court said that Weed ignored the legislative mandate that for tax purposes agricultural property and agricultural homestead property are to be classified and valued separately and that the land and dwelling of an agricultural homestead are to be valued separately. "Not only does relator [Weed] ignore the legislative mandate," the court said, "he ignores the reality that agricultural homestead land has greater value than bare agricultural land." The tax court decision was affirmed.

Weed v. County of Filmore

Supreme Court of Minnesota

July 26, 2001

COPYRIGHT 2002 The Appraisal Institute
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2002 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Michael Weed, County of Filmore
Publication:Appraisal Journal
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1U4MN
Date:Jul 1, 2002
Previous Article:Leased property not exempt from taxation. (Cases in Brief).
Next Article:Expert's written appraisal report ruled hearsay. (Cases in Brief).

Related Articles
The accountant's role in the bankruptcy valuation process.
Appraising continuing care retirement centers: the income approach.
Logical steps in property valuation.
The impact of detrimental conditions on property values.
Special-design properties: identifying the "market" in market value.
The Federal Rules of Evidence and Daubert: Evaluating Real Property Valuation Witnesses.
Valuation and the Property Tax.
A week of farms, homes, land sales and soot!
Noteworthy valuation-related papers from the American Real Estate Society Annual Meeting.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters