- 22 -
Respondent's evidence that the Joe Bass account at the Trust
Company was petitioner's nominee account does not rise to the
level of clear and convincing.6 Respondent offered no
handwriting expert to show that the Joe Bass signature was
petitioner's. Indeed, the Government's handwriting expert
testified at the criminal trial that the comparison of
petitioner's handwriting exemplar with the Joe Bass signature was
inconclusive. Also, respondent offered no evidence that
petitioner ever withdrew any funds from the Joe Bass account.
Respondent has also failed to prove by clear and convincing
evidence that the check payments to the order of Joe Bass
represent consulting fees earned by petitioner. Respondent's
only witness concerning these transactions, Mr. Grillo, could not
remember what, if any, services were performed for these
payments. However, he also testified that petitioner helped
secure loans for Walter Capital. Mr. Grillo's equivocal
testimony leaves us unpersuaded that respondent has sustained her
burden. Mr. Grillo further testified that Walter Capital did
issue a Form 1099 regarding these payments and that it would
indicate the reason for the payments and the person receiving
them. Mr. Grillo testified that he believed that the Form 1099
6 Petitioner did plead guilty in the criminal case, and has
stipulated in this case, to receiving the Renaissance check to
Joe Bass for $31,115 during 1983, and its inclusion in his
income. This does not, however, constitute clear and convincing
proof that other funds paid into the Joe Bass account went to or
were under the control of petitioner.
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011