Elizabeth B. Miller - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         

          issued to Stephen in an account labeled "Notes Receivable--S.               
          Miller" in petitioner's general ledger.7                                    
               Petitioner gave8 Stephen the two $50,000 checks in question            
          in response to his request for her assistance in paying off a               
          mortgage in the approximate amount of $56,000 that encumbered the           
          house that he and his wife had purchased in 1980 for $300,000 and           
          that became due in 1982.  In November 1982, Stephen used approxi-           
          mately $56,000 of the $100,000 that he received from petitioner             
          in order to retire that mortgage.                                           
               In connection with petitioner's issuance of the two $50,000            
          checks to Stephen, he signed a non-interest-bearing note dated              
          September 14, 1982 (September 1982 note) in the principal amount            
          of $100,000 that was payable to petitioner.  Although petitioner            
          was generally familiar with the concept of secured obligations,             
          she did not request Stephen to secure that note, and it was not             
          secured, by real property or any other collateral.                          
               The September 1982 note provided that Stephen was to pay               
          petitioner $100,000 on demand or on September 14, 1985, if no               
          demand was made.  In other words, pursuant to the terms of that             


          7  While Mr. Delmarter was responsible for supervising PKF's                
          maintenance of petitioner's financial records, other individuals            
          employed by PKF made the actual entries in those records to                 
          reflect petitioner's financial transactions.                                
          8  The use herein of the words "gave", "note", "obligation",                
          "loan", "principal", "forgiveness", "indebtedness", and similar             
          words does not reflect the Court's view of the substance of the             
          transactions at issue.                                                      



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