- 82 - the [projects] would produce the desired efficiency, not whether they could, in fact, be developed.'" Id. at 1288. The District Court's opinion is, unfortunately, of little benefit to us because of the lack of a detailed record from which we can compare the facts therein to the facts before us. Moreover, we are not bound by the District Court's analysis. See A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co. & Subs. v. Commissioner, 105 T.C. 166, 208 (1995), revd. on other grounds and remanded 119 F.3d 482 (7th Cir. 1997); Estate of Schwartz v. Commissioner, 83 T.C. 943, 952 (1984). Consequently, we will not rely on or otherwise refer to United Stationers in evaluating the present case. 6. The Experts Both parties rely upon the opinions of experts in support of their respective positions. Both parties' experts prepared initial and rebuttal reports and testified in support of those reports. The experts reviewed thousands of pages of documents and interviewed many Norwest employees in the process of preparing their reports and testimony. We look to the parties' experts to aid us in applying the facts relating to Norwest's eight internal use software development activities to the seven tests for internal use software under section 41. We evaluate the opinions of an expert in light of the expert's qualifications and all other evidence in the record. Estate of Christ v. Commissioner, 480 F.2d 171, 174 (9th Cir. 1973), affg. 54Page: Previous 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011