William T. and Nicole L. Gladden - Page 2




                                        - 2 -                                          

               In 1993, as investors in a partnership named Saddle Mountain            
          Ranch which owned land in Harquahala Valley, Arizona (the                    
          partnership), petitioners received a portion of $28.7 million                
          paid by the Federal Government to certain Harquahala Valley                  
          landowners in connection with the landowners' relinquishment of              
          the right each year to receive Colorado River water to irrigate              
          their land (water rights).                                                   
               Initially, the parties cross-move for partial summary                   
          judgment on the issue as to whether the partnership’s water                  
          rights constitute capital assets.  Respondent would treat the                
          partnership's water rights as not rising to the level of capital             
          assets.                                                                      
               If, as a matter of partial summary judgment, we conclude                
          that petitioners' water rights do constitute capital assets, then            
          the parties cross-move for partial summary judgment on the issue             
          as to whether the funds should be regarded as having been                    
          received in a sale or exchange for the water rights so as to                 
          qualify the funds received as capital gain income.                           
               If each of the above issues is resolved in favor of                     
          petitioners, the parties cross-move for partial summary judgment             
          on the issue as to whether any of the partnership's approximate              
          $675,000 tax basis in its ownership interest in Harquahala Valley            
          land is allocable to and would offset funds received for the                 
          water rights.                                                                
               If each of the above issues is resolved in favor of                     
          petitioners, petitioners then move for partial summary judgment              


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011