Opinion ID: 1134395
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Plaintiffs' testimony of damages.

Text: Plaintiffs' complaint asks, in the event of the refusal of an injunction, that they be awarded damages in the sum of $8,000. To support that request plaintiffs offered the testimony of a realtor-appraiser to the effect that the value of plaintiffs' house without the obstruction of the house to the north and assuming that the house to the north did not exist was $76,500, but that after its construction the value of plaintiffs' house was $69,000. The realtor-appraiser stated that the reason for this difference in value was that a purchaser will not pay as much for a house that does not have a view, or has a limited view, as for one that has a panoramic or unlimited view. He also testified that the portion of defendants' house involving the windows in the basement is not pertinent to any obstruction of view    or loss of value to the Drulards   . To the contrary, defendants offered as a witness an appraiser who testified that although defendants' house does restrict a portion of their [plaintiffs'] view, it does not do so substantially or enough to cause any damage. This appraiser also testified to the effect that when plaintiffs sold the lot to the Alexanders in 1973 they were restricting some of their view, because a house could then be built on that lot twenty-four feet high from the center line of the lot, in accord with the building restrictions, so as to result in an even greater obstruction of plaintiffs' view than the obstruction resulting from defendants' house. For these reasons, defendants' appraiser concluded that the value of plaintiffs' house was $70,000 both before and after the construction of defendants' house.