Laserfiche WebLink
Letter to Susie L. Smith <br />June 23, 2004 <br />Page 7 <br /> <br /> That is why experts are hired to make assumptions since their likelihood of being <br />correct is far greater than someone who is not an expert. MWMC employed a qualified, <br />independent consultant with the necessary expertise to make realistic assumptions.3 The mere <br />fact that the assumptions may prove to be less than 100% accurate (and probably will to some <br />degree) does not make the assumption invalid or illegal. So long as the expert making the <br />assumptions has reasonable grounds for doing so, the assumptions will not be subject to <br />successful legal challenge. <br /> <br /> III. Conclusion. <br /> <br /> The Homebuilders seem intent on linking the Methodology with the Facilities <br />Plan and Capital Improvements List so that every change will open up all parts of the program to <br />review and legal challenge. If that is done, it will add to the cost and time necessary to make <br />even the most minor changes to the Capital Improvements List. It's a policy matter whether to <br />combine them. But, combining everything is not legally required. <br /> <br /> Very truly yours, <br /> <br /> THORP, PURDY, JEWETT, <br /> URNESS & WILKINSON, P.C. <br /> <br /> Laurence E. Thorp <br />LET:mkf <br />00085544.000.DOG <br /> <br />3 That is what the agreement between MWMC and the Homebuilders required. Mr. Stamp takes the position that <br /> <br />because the consultant hired by MWMC used assumptions that the Homebuilders dislike, the assumptions are <br />necessarily wrong as a matter of law. That is not tree. A copy of the Agreement is attached. <br /> <br /> <br />