Opinion ID: 1259078
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Timberon Lot

Text: The trial court originally fixed the value of the parties' lot in Timberon, New Mexico, at $8,000. It gave the lot to Robert. After Robert moved for reconsideration, the court revised the value to $6,000. On appeal, Robert challenges this value as unsupported, arguing that the only value substantiated by the record is $4,000, the amount indicated in the most recent tax assessment on the Timberon property. The trial court, however, properly expressed doubt concerning the reliability of the tax assessment, which purported to be based on a percentage of the full value of the property but did not explain what full value meant. Moreover, testimony was presented at trial supporting the $6,000 value that the trial court ultimately determined to be the property's value. Rita testified that the Davilas originally bought the lot for $8,000. Robert, on the other hand, stated in his trial brief that the value of the lot was $6,000. At trial, he attempted to equivocate. On direct examination, he stated that he had no idea what the market value of the property might be. Yet when the trial court asked Robert the basis for the $6,000 value listed in his trial brief, he stated, Speculation. We paid $5,000, and I figure it would be at least  we'd be able to get $1,000 more out of it. Taking Robert's testimony in conjunction with Rita's, the trial court could reasonably conclude that the Timberon property was worth more than its $4,000 assessed tax value. The court could also reasonably opt to set the value at $6,000, Robert's own estimate, instead of $8,000, Rita's estimate. [1] The trial court's finding was not clearly erroneous.