Laurie A. Ortolano Trust v. City of Nashua
Docket Nos.: 29472-18PT/29699-19PT
Page 6 of 18
evidence, support a finding the 2014 sale price is not a reliable indicator of the Property’s market
value in tax years 2018 and 2019.
In making market value findings, the board examines the quality and probative value of
the evidence presented and not necessarily the sheer quantity or volume of documents and
testimony submitted, especially when not germane to the focus of each appeal. The Taxpayer
submitted 48 admitted exhibits in the 2018 appeal and 24 admitted exhibits in the 2019 appeal.
The City presented ten admitted exhibits in each of the two appeals. The Taxpayer presented the
testimony of Laurie Ortolano and did not call its appraiser as a witness. The City presented the
testimony of its appraiser, Vern J. Gardner, Jr.
As is typical in appeals involving residential properties, both appraisers utilized the sales
comparison approach to value. In reviewing the evidence as a whole, the board finds
deficiencies in both appraisals and therefore makes its own market value findings, independent
of each appraiser’s specific market value estimates.
With respect to the Taxpayer’s evidence, the board finds its appraisals ostensibly
prepared and signed by Peter E. Stanhope of The Stanhope Group, LLC did not adequately
adjust for improving market conditions between the date of sales and the effective dates of the
appraisals (April 1, 2018 and April 1, 2019). Since neither Mr. Stanhope nor his associate who
worked on the appraisal testified, they were not available for cross-examination or questions
from the board regarding their work and value estimates. An appraiser’s absence lessens, to
some extent, the weight the board can give to his or her value estimates.
The City’s appraiser, Mr. Gardner, did testify at length and was subject to extensive
cross-examination. As discussed above, there are reasons to question use of the 2014 sale price.
