- 7 -
The parties disagree as to the highest and best use and the
valuation method to be applied. Both parties presented the
testimony of expert witnesses to support their respective
positions.
A. Burden of Proof
The estate argues that respondent’s notice of deficiency was
arbitrary, and the burden of proof should shift to respondent.
We do not find the notice of deficiency arbitrary. In addition,
we decide this case on the preponderance of the evidence, and our
analysis is not affected by the burden of proof. See Blodgett v.
Commissioner, 394 F.3d 1030, 1035 (8th Cir. 2005), affg. T.C.
Memo. 2003-212.
B. Experts
A witness that qualifies as an expert by knowledge, skill,
experience, training, or education can give opinion testimony if
his special knowledge will assist the Court in understanding the
evidence or determining a fact at issue and if his opinion is
supported by sufficient facts and is based on reliable principles
and methods that were applied reliably to the facts of the case.
See Fed. R. Evid. 702. We are, however, not bound by expert
opinions and may reach a decision based on our own analysis of
all the evidence in the record. Helvering v. Natl. Grocery Co.,
304 U.S. 282, 295 (1938); Silverman v. Commissioner, 538 F.2d
927, 933 (2d Cir. 1976), affg. T.C. Memo. 1974-285; Estate of
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