Walgreen Co. & Subsidiaries - Page 2

               David J. Duez, Lydia R.B. Kelley, and Gregory F. Jenner, for           
          petitioner.                                                                 
               James S. Stanis, Patricia Pierce Davis, and James M.                   
          Cascino, for respondent.                                                    
                           SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION                            
               NIMS, Judge:  In Walgreen Co. & Subs. v. Commissioner, 103             
          T.C. 582 (1994), revd. and remanded 68 F.3d 1006 (7th Cir. 1995),           
          we held that section 5 of the Act of January 3, 1975 (1974 Act),            
          Pub. L. 93-625, 88 Stat. 2112, removed all section 1250 property            
          from the Asset Depreciation Range (ADR) classification system,              
          until such time as the Treasury Department prescribed class lines           
          explicitly containing section 1250 property, which had not been             
          done as of the time the case was submitted.  Since the parties              
          stipulated that all of the leasehold improvements in dispute                
          constituted section 1250 property, we held, consistently with the           
          foregoing holding, that the improvements had no ADR class life              
          and that, consequently, section 168(c)(2)(D) designated them as             
          15-year real property, as opposed to 10-year recovery property.             
               Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to              
          sections of the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in            
          issue.  Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice              
          and Procedure.                                                              
               The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed             
          and remanded this case for a further factual determination,                 
          described infra.  Walgreen Co. & Subs. v. Commissioner, 68 F.3d             






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011