I'm sure you're cheering for the attorneys - they no doubt represent everything you love about America: hard work rewarded, justice done, etc. We shareholders certainly got our money's worth on this one, didn't we?
Actually, I hope you will forward the article to your contact at Treasury (you know, the guy who told you the IRS is about to de-REIT PZN). I can't think of a better defense to the arm's length nature of the OPCO/PZN arrangements than the fact that the whole thing was challenged in court on that very issue (not a token challenge, but a formidable one worth $4 mil of legal effort), adjusted appropriately and approved by a judge. Not bad insurance for 4 cents per share. Also, I guess Cleo, Litt and others will have to stop crabbing about the OPCO - the lawyers fixed all the problems.
I can hear Doc on the stand in Tax Court, "Well, judge, I originally wanted to bleed the income from PZN into my pocket - strike that - into OPCO, not for my benefit, of course, but purely for tax reasons so no one would think PZN was getting disguised non-rental income. Then these hostile shareholders hired some sharp attorneys and held a gun to my head, forcing me to put more income than I planned into PZN. I really had no choice, your honor."
I am as much against frivolous lawsuits, as anybody. The point is, this one WAS REASONABLE. You are obviously conveniently forgetting, that in order to shove this merger down the shareholders throat, Doc HAD TO BRIBE TWO LARGEST SHAREHOLDERS, IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE YES VOTE. THIS COST CCA SHAREHOLDERS MUCH MORE IN LOST WEALTH, THAN THE PUNY $4 MILL PAID TO THE LAWYERS. And the nature of their lawsuit, was not the possible tax status of PZN, but uncompensated transfer of wealth from a public company to private ownership, connected with the corporate insiders. So, let us not revise history, my friend. IRS would still have to rule on it.