Harris v. Harris

MARTIN (Harry G), Judge.

Appellant first contends that the trial court erred in allowing Cleve G. Harris to testify, over objection, as to his opinion of whether the apportionment of the tobacco allotment among the individual tracts would increase or decrease the value of the entire property. She argues that the witness was not qualified as an expert and that his opinion had no probative value or proper foundation.

Any witness, not necessarily an expert, may give his opinion of the value of specific real property if he has knowledge gained from experience, information, and observation. 1…