Estate of Willie C. Lloyd, Deceased, Iva Nell Holman, Executrix - Page 27

                                       - 27 -                                         
          binding on this Court.  We recognize, however, that the                     
          definition of highest and best use set forth immediately above is           
          consistent with the principles of Frazee v. Commissioner, 98 T.C.           
          554 (1992); Symington v. Commissioner, supra; and Stanley Works &           
          Subs. v. Commissioner, supra.                                               
               a.   Parcel A                                                          
               Young and Dilmore both concluded that the highest and best             
          use of parcel A on the date of decedent's death was commercial in           
          nature.  Tidwell and Hearn, on the other hand, disagreed and                
          concluded that, as of the date of decedent's death, the highest             
          and best use of parcel A was residential in nature.  The                    
          classification as either commercial or residential is significant           
          because such classification is directly related to the appraisal            
          value of the property.  More specifically, with other factors               
          remaining constant, the value of commercial real estate generally           
          exceeds the value of residential real estate.  Respondent's                 
          determinations rely upon the Young and Dilmore conclusions, while           
          petitioner’s argument is based upon the Tidwell and Hearn                   
          conclusions.                                                                
               Much of the present dispute involves the zoning                        
          classification of parcel A as of the valuation date.  As of the             
          date of decedent's death, February 20, 1987, roughly half of                
          parcel A was within the city limits of the city of Birmingham,              
          Alabama.  The remaining portion of parcel A was located outside             
          the corporate limits of the city and in Jefferson County,                   




Page:  Previous  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011