- 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. 54
Page: Previous 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011