John T. Barrett, Jr. and Jane W. A. Barrett - Page 18

                                       - 18 -                                         
          Commissioner, 27 T.C. 330, 339 (1956), affd. 253 F.2d 928 (3d               
          Cir. 1958).                                                                 
               We also consider the fact that Drexel was current on its               
          interest obligations throughout 1989.  On August 23 and December            
          19, 1989, Drexel made interest payments on the note, a factor               
          that weighs against worthlessness.  Cole v. Commissioner, 871               
          F.2d 64, 67 (7th Cir. 1989), affg. T.C. Memo. 1987-228.                     
               Additionally, we consider the fact that the record is devoid           
          of any direct evidence of the worthlessness of the note.                    
          Although petitioner testified at trial that he observed certain             
          events which he believed “could have impaired Drexel’s capital or           
          its ability to do business”, such as the resignation of Michael             
          Milken during June 1989, Drexel’s payment of $500 million in                
          fines and restitution during September 1989, and a 216-point drop           
          in the Dow Jones Industrial Average on October 13, 1989,                    
          petitioner’s negative perceptions of Drexel’s condition, without            
          more, are inadequate to support a finding of worthlessness.  Fox            
          v. Commissioner, supra at 822.  Moreover, general unfavorable               
          circumstances have less to do with establishing worthlessness               
          than specific facts regarding the debtor’s assets and the amount            
          and validity of claims against it.  Dallmeyer v. Commissioner, 14           
          T.C. 1282, 1292-1293 (1950).                                                
               Petitioners argue that Drexel itself viewed the note as                
          worthless.  Petitioners rely on the fact that the notation “N/A”            
          appears beneath the words “Market Value” in monthly statements              




Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011