Court Opinion

ID: 9453673
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 18:20:19.651767+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:33:45.206364
License: Public Domain

TAMM, Circuit Judge
(dissenting):
I would reverse and remand this case for a new trial. In my opinion, the ad*574mission of testimony by the landowners’ expert appraisal witness relating to an unconsummated settlement offer defined only in the terms of the landowners’ statement of the figure he would accept in settlement of the case constituted prejudicial error. Since the landowners’ expert witness predicated his ultimate appraisal upon this unconsummated settlement figure, I believe that this witness’ testimony was without any evidentiary value. Without the testimony of this witness, the only testimony in the record is that of the appellee’s expert witness. Under these circumstances, I believe the case should be remanded for a new trial.
Before BAZELONy Chief Judge and DANAHER, BURGER, WRIGHT, Mc-GOWAN, TAMM, LEVENTHAL and ROBINSON, Circuit Judges, in Chambers.