Marder v. M. & C. C. of Baltimore

³⁰¹ Marbury, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. From a judgment for $32,000 entered on the inquisition of a jury in a condemnation case, the property owners bring this appeal. The property in question is located at 516-518 West Baltimore Street, Baltimore City, and has been owned by the appellants since 1946. They have used and occupied part of the first floor for their tailoring and woolen business since 1951.

It is subject to annual irredeemable ground rents of $120 and $144. The building is four stories in height, with partial cellar. The front is of brick construction with numerous glass block windows, which are frequently used in buildings of that type for lighting purposes. The property has a frontage of 36 feet 5 inches and a depth of 108 feet, to an alley which is used for delivery of materials and supplies to the occupants of the building.

The building contains an electric elevator, and was rented without interruption until 1956, when it became known that the area in which it was located would be involved in an urban renewal project. The City filed its petition for condemnation to acquire the property as part of the redevelopment project for the University of Maryland, and this specific location is to be used as part of the land for the new law school of the University. Prior to the trial, both appellee and appellants filed interrogatories seeking evaluation data concerning the subject property. The City attached to its answers to the interrogatories reports of three appraisers, and the appellants attached to their answers the report of their appraiser, Melvin Greenwald.

All four of the appraisers in their reports used the three standard methods of appraisal in arriving at their evaluation of the fair market value of the property sought to be condemned, namely, replacement costs and depreciation, income analysis, and market data analysis, although Greenwald’s report was the most elaborate. The trial was held in late March of 1963 and at the trial the City called to testify two of its appraisers as expert witnesses, who were conceded by appellants’ counsel to be qualified experts. The testimony of these witnesses was that the ³⁰² fair market value of the property, in their opinion, was, respectively, $24,720 and $31,500. The appellants presented as a witness Nathan Marder, one of the owners, who stated the property to be worth $64,600, basing, his opinion on what others were asking and getting for similar properties in the same neighborhood, and on their appraiser’s report.

The only other witness was their appraiser, Melvin Greenwald, a real estate broker. After direct and cross examination, and questioning by the court as to Mr. Greenwald’s qualification, an objection by the City was sustained to the proffer of Mr. Greenwald’s opinion as to the fair market value of the subject property. He was allowed, however, to describe the property and to testify to sales and rentals in the vicinity to the extent of his knowledge of such transactions. There are three contentions made on this appeal.

I. The lower court committed reversible error by refusing to permit the witness Greenwald to give his opinion of the fair market value of appellants’ property.

II

It committed reversible error in instructing the jury: “You are not to consider any increase or decrease in the value of the property caused by the announcement that the property was to be condemned.” III. It was reversible error to exclude the witness Greenwald from the courtroom until called upon to testify. I Greenwald was not allowed to give his opinion as to the market value of appellants’ property because the court below believed he was not qualified to give such an opinion. In reaching that conclusion we think that the court below committed prejudicial error.

The testimony of Mr. Greenwald as to his qualifications brought out the facts that he was a real estate broker and appraiser, that he had been engaged in the real estate business three years, dividing his time approximately one-third each in buying and selling properties, management of property, and appraising, that he handled commercial and ³⁰³ industrial property, that he had been the rental agent for two downtown properties, that he was a member of the Brokers, Owners and Managers Association and the Real Estate Board of Greater Baltimore, that he made appraisals on property, that he represented First Federated Life Insurance Company and other companies on their