- 14 -
bear the burden of disproving respondent's determination.
Rule 142, Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Petitioners boldly assert that the funds obtained from
Colonial Bank "were neither swindled, embezzled or [sic]
misappropriated". According to petitioners, Mr. Bradshaw
obtained those funds from Colonial Bank as a loan. To
establish "a bona fide debt obligation", petitioners rely
on the prior course of dealing between Mr. Bradshaw and
Colonial Bank, the security agreement between Motion, Inc.,
and Colonial Bank, the original petition filed by Colonial
Bank in State court to initiate suit against petitioner and
Motion, Inc., and the default judgment rendered by the
State court in that case.
According to petitioners, a debt obligation to
Colonial Bank arose when the four worthless checks were
returned unpaid. Petitioners contend that "this is the
same type of transaction that Petitioner Ronald Bradshaw
[had] participated in numerous times with Colonial prior to
the date the four (4) checks were returned." They further
contend that "the Security Agreement was entered into for
the sole purpose of securing the type of extensions of
credit which is the subject of this dispute." Petitioners
point to Colonial Bank's suit in State court and assert
that "The Default Judgment was granted exclusively on the
Security Agreement and the banking relationship which
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011