- 14 -
subject to his right to be reimbursed for one-half of the
payments he made with his separate funds.
Petitioner argues that the written list of expenses his
former spouse gave him, the letters exchanged by the attorneys,
and notations petitioner claims he made on checks he issued,
considered together, constitute a written separation agreement.
We disagree. An agreement requires mutual assent or a meeting of
the minds. Kronish v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 684, 693 (1988).
Letters which do not show that there was a meeting of the minds
are not a written separation agreement under section 71(b)(2).
Grant v. Commissioner, supra; Estate of Hill v. Commissioner, 59
T.C. 846, 856-857 (1973). There was no agreement reached in the
letters between the family law attorneys. The letters show only
that there was a negotiation. Preston made nine proposals,
including family support of $4,000 per month, in his letter dated
August 13, 1987. Magarian said two provisions were acceptable,
two were conditionally acceptable, and five were unacceptable.
Magarian rejected Preston's proposal that petitioner pay family
support of $4,000 per month.
Petitioner contends that he noted on each of his checks that
the payment was for support and that those check notations are a
part of the written separation agreement. We disagree. The
checks are not in evidence. Even if they were, the fact that
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011