I'm trying to understand the Daubert Motion upon which expert testimony can be excluded.
Does the appraiser who serves as an expert witness provide what is referred to as "scientific" knowledge?
(The issue is more complex than I understand at this point in time but I'm trying to enhance my knowledge of expert witnessing in case I ever have that opportunity.)
Read the Tax Court's decision in
Boltar v. Commissioner. The case is independently important because it was the first application by the Tax Court of the
Daubert decision to a tax matter. However, for you and other appraisers, it contains a very instructive discussion of
Daubert and how
Daubert principles apply to appraisal expert witness testimony. On your specific question about whether an appraiser serving as an expert provides "scientific" knowledge, if you read the case, you'll see that's not really too pertinent because proper expert testimony may be "scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge." It's possible that some expert work done by appraisers may be scientific, but I'd say more typically it falls under technical or specialized knowledge. (FYI, in my opinion, when working as an "expert" appraiser, don't use the word "art" to refer to your own appraisal work.)
As a general matter, if you follow recognized appraisal techniques and rely on data that appears basically reliable and do not ignore obvious contrary information, you don't have to worry much in practice about exclusion of expert testimony under
Daubert. That means your testimony/opinions will come in as evidence -- which is a different question than the evidentiary weight that a judge or jury may give to your testimony/opinions (i.e., an appraisal opinion can be allowed to come in as evidence, but that doesn't mean the court has to believe it).
Also, keep in mind that you are in CA and that principles of
Daubert (a federal court decision under the Federal Rules of Evidence) do not specifically apply in CA state court because CA does not use a version of the Federal Rules of Evidence but has its own, somewhat different evidentiary code.
Daubert is a topic that I touch on in a seminar I have described in the education forum.
-- Peter Christensen, LIA's general counsel
