Court Opinion

ID: 9951328
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-15 19:19:11.796217+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:38:41.151425
License: Public Domain

Vermont Superior Court
                                                                                                             Filed 01/29 24
                                                                                                                Orleans nit

VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT                                                                CIVIL DIVISION
Orleans Unit                                                                       Case N0. 22-CV-03111
247 Main Street
                                                        f1
Newport VT 05855
802-334—3305
www.vermontjudiciary.org

                                        Margie Sisco v. Ralph Wheeler et al

                                                  ENTRY ORDER

        The panics in this case have left the determination of value for the subject property in the hands
of the Court to determine based on the competing appraisals offered by the parties. After careful
review of the ﬁlings, the Court has determined that it does no require a site Visit or a third appraiser as
allowed in the parties’ stipulated motion to determine the fair market value of the property located at
175 Brook Road in Morgan, Vermont.

        Based on the appraisals, the Court ﬁnds as follows. 175 Brook Road is a 6086 square foot

property where a single-family residence is located. The residence is 1,077 square feet in space, and it
has six rooms, including two bedrooms, and a full bathroom. It was constructed in 2011 on a concrete

slab. It is average construction that has been well-maintained. The property has 86 feet of frontage on

Lake Seymour in Morgan, Vermont. The house is situated to have a view of the lake and easy access
to the shoreline. The house has a small balcony, a covered porch, a small, attached shed, and a larger,

detached shed. It sits at the end of a residential road that is several hundred feet from State highway

111, which is the main arterial road that runs around the north and east sides of Lake Seymour. There
is no heating system in the house, and the wastewater system has failed, which will require the
installation of a new system, which is likely to cost between $17,000 to $25,000.

        Both appraisers agree that the real estate market in which 175 Brook Road is located is stable at
this time in terms of property values, demand and supply, and growth. In other words, there are houses

around the lake entering the market at a rate that is meeting the demand and is resulting in properties

holding their value over an extended period of time.

        Plaintiff” s appraiser has determined the value of 175 Brook Road to be $375,000 based on his
review of the property and a sales comparison review with ﬁve other properties within the immediate

Order                                                                                  Page 1 of 4
22—CV—03111 Margie Sisco V. Ralph Wheeler et al
Vicinity of 175 Brook Road.1 Each of these comparable properties had been sold in an arm’s length
transaction within the previous 12 months. Plaintiff’s appraiser’s analysis contained several elements
of close comparison between the various properties to determine their value in comparison to the
conditions and features of 175 Brook Road. This included or increasing value for differences in size of
the lot and house, adjusting for quality, condition, and amenities with one exception, the review

provides no credit for properties with heating and air conditioning systems in contrast to 175 Brook
Road. Four of the ﬁve comparables sold for between $320,000 and $3 67,000.The only outlier is the
most distant comparable, which sold for $500,000 but also required the greatest net adjustments to

compare with 175 Brook Road. Plaintiff s appraiser does not appear to have credited or discounted

any of the comparables to account for the fact that 175 Brook Road has a failed wastewater system.

         Defendant’s appraiser has determined the value of 175 Brook Road to be $250,000 based on
her review of the property and a sales comparison review with four other properties? All four of the

comparable properties had been sold in an arm’s length transaction, but one of the three had closed in
2021, nearly two years before the appraisal. Defendant’s appraiser’s analysis contained several
elements of close comparison between the various properties to determine their value in comparison to

the conditions and features of 175 Brook Road. This included or increasing value for differences in

size of the lot and house, adjusting for quality, condition, and amenities, including providing credit and
deductions for properties with heating and air conditioning systems in contrast to 175 Brook Road.
Defendant’s appraiser’s comparables represent both a wider range of prices (ranging from $195,000 to

$410,000) and a wider set of locations with two properties located more than 8 miles from 175 Brook
Road, one located more than two miles, and one less than two miles. Out of the four comparables,
only one was located on Lake Seymour.

         From the evidence, it appears that both appraisers acted within the range and scope of their

authority and licenses as appraisers, and that each focused on the qualities and comparisons that they,
in their professional judgment, found to be critical in comparing 175 Brook Road with surrounding

properties. In evaluating the two, however, the Court ﬁnds that Plaintiff’s comparables and

1
 4 out of 5 of Plaintiff’s appraiser’s comparables were located within 1.54 miles of 175 Brook Road. The fifth property
was located a little over 2 miles. This fifth property was not only the furthest comparable, but it was the property that
 had the largest net adjustments to control for variations in quality from 175 Brook Road.

2
  Defendant’s Appraiser also issued an October 2023 update to her original April 2023 appraisal and added three other
properties. The update, which was primarily intended to determine if there had been an adjustment to prior appraisal,
did not evaluate these three new properties in the same manner as the original appraisal and did not apply any
adjustment.

Order                                                                                                Page 2 of 4
22—CV—03111 Margie Sisco v. Ralph Wheeler et a1
accompanying analysis are more persuasive in establishing the fair market value of the property for the
purpose of this partition with two necessary reductions. The reasons that the Court finds Plaintiff’s
expert’s analysis more credible is for a variety of factors. Most importantly, Plaintiff’s comparables
are drawn entirely from Lake Seymour. While Defendant’s expert’s comparables are all lakefront or
lakeview properties, they involve other lakes that may or may not have the qualities of Lake Seymour,
which is a large lake with several shallow areas that lets it warm up at a quicker rate in the summer,
than a deeper lake—such as Willoughby—and allows for more recreational activities at different
points along the lake. Readily apparent differences like this and other subtle differences persuade the
Court that comparables drawn from other lakes in the immediate area are not as likely to yield an
accurate estimate of value as properties drawn from the lake and the immediate area when controlling
for other factors and qualities.

        The Court is also persuaded that Plaintiff’s experts’ adjustments to the comparables were
overall more consistent. By way of example, Defendant’s expert reduced the value of one property in
her comparison by $73,000 because it had 0.30 of an acre more land than 175 Brook Road, but for
subsequent properties she actually added value in the amount of $9,000 and $42,000 for properties that
had 0.2 and 0.71 more acres of land. It is not clear from the report why one property saw a decrease
from the additional land while the others had an increase. In contrast, Plaintiff’s appraisal consistently
deducted value attributable to additional land in the comparables.

        While both parties agree that the real estate market in the area is stable, the fact that Plaintiff’s
expert’s comparables are more recent gives the Court greater confidence that these numbers reflect
more accurately the current market conditions. This is borne out by looking at the overall prices for
properties sold on Lake Seymour. Removing the highest and lowest properties, all of the properties on
the lake have sold within the past two years for amounts between $320,000 and $370,000. While this
comparison is not dispositive, it does give the Court further reason to find Plaintiff’s expert’s
evaluation to be more credible.

        While the Court accepts Plaintiff’s valuation of $375,000, it does find that this amount must be
reduced based on two conditions. First, the Court finds that the valuation must be reduced by $25,000
to account for the failed wastewater system at the property, which is not accounted for in Plaintiff’s
analysis. Second, the Court finds that the valuation must be reduced by an additional $11,000 to
account for the lack of a heating system on the premises, which was not accounted for in Plaintiff’s
expert’s analysis or even in the comparison to the comparables.

Order                                                                                    Page 3 of 4
22-CV-03111 Margie Sisco v. Ralph Wheeler et al
                                                  ORDER

        Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the value of 175 Brooks Road, Morgan, Vermont
is $339,000. Under the terms and conditions of the parties’ stipulation and 12 V.S.A. § 5174, the
Court enters an award for 1/3 of this value, $113,000, to Plaintiff Margie Sisco. Counsel for Plaintiff
shall prepare a quit claim deed and property transfer tax return for his client to Defendants Randolph
Brent Wheeler, Thomas James Wheeler, and Nancy Wheeler Doyon or a person or entity named by
Defendants. This deed and PTTR shall be to the satisfaction of Defendants Counsel, and the payment
to Plaintiff Sisco shall occur at a closing where the deed from her to the Defendants or their elected
receiver is executed. Parties shall bear their own legal fees, but Defendants shall be responsible for
any closing costs, including recording fees.

        Parties shall file a confirmation of this closing with the Court, and the Court shall issue a final
judgment in this matter consistent with this decision and the parties’ stipulation.

Electronically signed on 1/26/2024 2:20 PM pursuant to V.R.E.F. 9(d)

__________________________________
Daniel Richardson
Superior Court Judge

Order                                                                                   Page 4 of 4
22-CV-03111 Margie Sisco v. Ralph Wheeler et al