Skip to Content (custom)

    That Appraisal Report is not Admissible

    Seven words from the bench and the assignment is over.

    That appraisal report is not admissible — the sentence this seminar exists to prevent


    It is almost never said because the appraiser lied. It is said because of the larger parcel. Because of one speculative element of damage. Because a cost got mistaken for a value, or a study got used as an appraisal, or nobody checked which courthouse they were standing in. This seminar is built entirely on appellate and Supreme Court decisions in which a real appraiser’s work was tested — and, in most of them, did not survive.


    Topics:
    Continuing Education
    Who Should Enroll
    General and Residential real estate appraisers along with attorneys.
    Course Offerings
    Sponsor Date Location Format
    Tennessee Chapter October 13, 2026 Synchronous View Details Register
    Tennessee Chapter October 13, 2026 Brentwood, TN Classroom View Details Register
    Course Objectives

    Upon completion, the participant will be able to:

    • Identify the controlling body of law before scoping the assignment — and explain why the same taking, by the same taker, can be governed by two different rulebooks with two different consequences for the identical error.
    • Apply the three unities to determine the larger parcel, and explain why an opinion built on the wrong larger parcel is set aside rather than discounted.
    • Distinguish the unit rule from its exception, and recognize when separately valuing portions of a tract crosses from permissible into fatal.
    • Separate compensable damage to the remainder from non-compensable consequences, including the line between impaired access and mere inconvenience.
    • Recognize an improper element of damage and articulate why a single one can render an otherwise sound value opinion incompetent in its entirety.
    • State the evidentiary nexus required before market stigma, fear, or risk may be considered — and demonstrate how it is proven from market data rather than asserted.
    • Compare the two competing expert-reliability standards and determine which governs in a given forum.
    • Evaluate an appraiser’s independence against two separate tribunals — a court, which does not apply USPAP, and a licensing board, which does
    Course Materials & Recommended Books

    The curriculum — 11 modules, 35 decisions

    Each decision — appellate and Supreme Court alike — is delivered as a branded, plain-English written brief: the facts, the holdings, what USPAP has to say about it, and a blunt set of instructor’s comments written from the appraiser’s side of the table — not the lawyer’s.

    1. Good-Faith Offers — the Bona Fide Attempt to Agree - 5 cases
    2. Zoning & the Reasonable Probability of Rezoning - 2 cases
    3. Partial Takings, the Unit Rule & Damage to the Remainder - 5 cases
    4. The Larger Parcel — the Foundation of Every Partial Taking - 4 cases
    5. Valuation Evidence & the Basis of the Opinion - 10 cases
    6. Public Use, Authority & Access - 4 cases
    7. Independence, Advocacy & the Two Tribunals - 2 cases
    8. Expert Admissibility — the Two Gatekeeping Standards - 3 cases
    9. One Project, a Cluster of Appeals - 5 cases
    10. One Pipe, Two Sovereigns - 4 cases
    11. Special-Value Sales - 2 cases