Connection lost
Server error
Recovery Group, Inc. v. Commissioner Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A company redeemed a minority of its stock and paid for a one-year non-compete agreement. The court held the payment must be amortized over 15 years, not one, because any stock acquisition triggers the amortization rule for § 197 intangibles.
Legal Significance: Establishes that the “substantial portion” test in I.R.C. § 197(d)(1)(E) applies only to asset acquisitions, not stock acquisitions. Any covenant connected to a stock acquisition, regardless of size, is a § 197 intangible amortizable over 15 years.
Recovery Group, Inc. v. Commissioner Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Recovery Group, Inc., an S corporation, redeemed 23% of its outstanding stock from a departing founder, James Edgerly. As part of the buyout, Recovery Group paid Edgerly an additional $400,000 for a one-year “noncompetition and non-solicitation agreement.” On its income tax returns, Recovery Group amortized the $400,000 payment over the one-year term of the covenant, claiming corresponding deductions. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) determined that the covenant was a “section 197 intangible.” Consequently, the IRS asserted that the cost of the covenant must be amortized over the 15-year period mandated by I.R.C. § 197(a), not its one-year term. This recharacterization resulted in a partial disallowance of the company’s deductions and created tax deficiencies for both the corporation and its shareholders. The taxpayers argued that § 197(d)(1)(E) only applies to covenants connected with an acquisition of a “substantial portion” of stock, which they claimed 23% was not. The Tax Court ruled in favor of the Commissioner, and the taxpayers appealed.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a covenant not to compete entered into in connection with a stock redemption constitute a “section 197 intangible” subject to a 15-year amortization period, regardless of whether the redeemed stock represents a “substantial portion” of the corporation’s total stock?
Yes. The court affirmed the Tax Court’s decision, holding that the covenant Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nul
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a covenant not to compete entered into in connection with a stock redemption constitute a “section 197 intangible” subject to a 15-year amortization period, regardless of whether the redeemed stock represents a “substantial portion” of the corporation’s total stock?
Conclusion
This case clarifies the scope of I.R.C. § 197(d)(1)(E), providing a bright-line Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea co
Legal Rule
A covenant not to compete entered into in connection with an acquisition Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidata
Legal Analysis
The court began by finding the statutory language of I.R.C. § 197(d)(1)(E)—"an Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea co
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Holding: A covenant not to compete entered into in connection with