- 170 - 8. UB $1,830,000 Loan Transaction Respondent concedes that a loan, in fact, was made to BOT in the UB $1,830,000 loan transaction125 and acknowledges on brief that the identity of the lender is the only issue presented here. It is petitioner's position that the lender in that transaction was Union Bank. It is respondent's position that the lender was Pempire, the foreign corporation pledging collateral for the UB $1,830,000 loan, because that corporation was "the ultimate source of the loans to BOT". Proceeding from and constrained by respondent's concession that a loan, in fact, was made to BOT in the UB $1,830,000 loan transaction, we limit our inquiry to a determination of the identity of the lender. The record establishes that, in form, Union Bank funded the UB $1,830,000 loan to BOT and that, at the direction of petitioner on behalf of BOT, the proceeds of that loan were used to purchase the Pempire $1,830,000 CD that secured that loan. Thus, Pempire did not fund the certificate of deposit that was pledged to secure the UB $1,830,000 loan. Consequently, Pempire could not have been, in the words of respondent, "the ultimate source" of the UB $1,830,000 loan to BOT. Based upon our examination of the entire record in these cases, and bearing in mind respondent's concession that a loan 125 Petitioner testified, respondent disputes, and the evidence in the record does not reliably establish that the UB $1,830,000 loan was used to repay a loan to BOT that Pempire had previously made.Page: Previous 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011