Estate of Arthur G. Scanlan, Deceased, Ruth B. Scanlan, Administratrix - Page 3

                                           - 3 -                                             
                Decedent died on July 16, 1991, while domiciled in Gonzales,                 
          Louisiana.  Administratrix is his surviving spouse, and she is                     
          the administratrix of his estate.2  At the time of Decedent's                      
          death, he owned an undivided 50-percent community interest in                      
          50,000 shares of Eatel voting stock.  Eatel, which was formerly                    
          Data and Telecommunications Co., Inc. (DATA),3 is a                                
          telecommunications company that provides the following services                    
          through its wholly owned subsidiaries:  Telephone services,                        
          telecommunications and electronic equipment sales, answering and                   
          secretarial services, and administrative services.  On the                         
          Valuation Dates, Eatel’s wholly owned subsidiaries were:                           
          (1) East Ascension Telephone Co., Inc., (2) H & E., Inc.,                          
          (3) Advanced Tel., Inc., and (4) Eatelnet, Inc.                                    
                Eatel’s outstanding stock on the Valuation Dates consisted                   
          of 868,200 shares of voting stock and 96,466 shares of nonvoting                   

                2 We do not know where Administratrix resided at the time of                 
          the petition.                                                                      
                3 The parties have not explained (and the record does not                    
          reveal) whether the change from DATA to Eatel was merely one in                    
          name, or whether it stemmed from a corporate acquisition or                        
          reorganization.  Although petitioner’s counsel stated during                       
          trial that “The name [of DATA] was changed [to Eatel] as of                        
          August 31, [1989],” there is no evidence in the record to support                  
          that statement.  See United States v. Kane, 887 F.2d 568, 572 n.5                  
          (5th Cir. 1989) (statements by counsel are not evidence); U.S.                     
          Holding Co. v. Commissioner, 44 T.C. 323, 327 (1965); Danco Co.                    
          v. Commissioner, 17 T.C. 1493, 1497 (1952); Lyon v. Commissioner,                  
          1 B.T.A. 378 (1925).  Indeed, a valuation report that                              
          petitioner’s expert prepared on DATA as of Aug. 31, 1989, appears                  
          to disprove the statement of petitioner’s counsel.  The expert’s                   
          report refers to DATA as “DATA”, and it makes no reference to a                    
          name change to Eatel.                                                              




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