- 54 -
546, 551 (1973); Amerada Hess Corp. v. Commissioner, 517 F.2d at
83; Estate of Hall v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 312, 335 (1989); sec.
20.2031-1(b), Estate Tax Regs. The buyer and the seller are
hypothetical, and their characteristics are not necessarily the
same as the personal characteristics of the actual seller or of a
particular buyer. Propstra v. United States, 680 F.2d 1248,
1251-1252 (9th Cir. 1982); Estate of Bright v. United States, 658
F.2d 999, 1005-1006 (5th Cir. 1981); Estate of Jung v.
Commissioner, 101 T.C. 412, 437-438 (1993).
Petitioners contend that for purposes of ascertaining the
amount realized from the sale of the stock of the Subsidiaries to
HealthTrust the fair market value of the Securities as of
September 17, 1987, was $299,500,000. As an alternative argument
to the Danielson rule, respondent contends that the fair market
value of the Securities acquired by HCAII as partial
consideration for that stock is $432,166,650 as of September 17,
1987 (i.e., the values J.C. Bradford assigned to them).
Expert Testimony
In support of their position, petitioners presented the
expert testimony of Charles T. Harris III (Mr. Harris), a partner
in Goldman Sachs and the team leader for the Goldman Sachs
Valuation. At trial, respondent presented no expert testimony as
to the fair market value of the Securities.12 As a substitute,
12 At trial, respondent sought to subpoena as an expert witness
Robert S. Doolittle (Mr. Doolittle), a partner in J.C. Bradford &
(continued...)
Page: Previous 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011