-16-
evidence that she has "paid" the subject fees and costs. On the
contrary, the "reimbursement" check written by petitioner to Mr.
Thompson is additional evidence that he is the person who paid
the fees and costs in this case.
The conduct of petitioner and Mr. Thompson strongly suggests
that it was never intended that petitioner would incur or pay any
fees in this matter. In our judgment the timing of the
"reimbursement" check and petitioner's lack of liquid funds
strongly suggest an attempt by petitioner and her husband to
circumvent the net worth requirement for a section 7430 award,
rather than her bona fide payment of an obligation. We must look
to the substance of what occurred. Allowance of a fee award to
petitioner would effectively allow her to recover costs incurred
by Mr. Thompson, an ineligible litigant, who actually absorbed
the financial burden of the litigation.
In addition, we need not address petitioner's arguments
sounding in contract, including quantum meruit, at any length.
Suffice it to say that payment to a creditor discharges a
debtor's obligation. See Ga. Code Ann. sec. 13-4-40 (Michie
1982). Unlike Christoph v. United States, 931 F. Supp. 1564
(S.D. Ga. 1996), payments of all the litigation costs here at
issue were made by the company and charged as compensation to Mr.
Thompson.
Based on the record before us, we hold that petitioner has
failed to carry her burden of showing that she paid or incurred,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011