Sharon Lee Bartlett, F.K.A. Heitzman - Page 23

                                       - 23 -                                         

          the assumption agreements.  The letter explained that the limited           
          partners were required to sign this agreement in order to reduce            
          their liabilities.  In return, the principal payment date would             
          be extended until December 31, 2001, and the recourse liabilities           
          reduced by a consolidation of operations with another                       
          partnership, Consolidated Petroleum Equities, Ltd. (CPE).  The              
          revenues of this new entity were to be applied at a rate of 0.01            
          percent of “the value of CPE’s share of production from its wells           
          before deducting royalties or expenses” for every “$1,000 of                
          outstanding assumed liabilities”.  The letter contained no                  
          financial projections to illuminate how this would be done.  The            
          proffered documents also purported to release Wind River,                   
          Freemond, and other principals from any liability arising from              
          Stonehurst.  On the advice of counsel, Mr. Heitzman did not sign            
          this agreement.                                                             
               On March 23, 1987, Freemond sent a note to the limited                 
          partners, exhorting them to execute the documents described                 
          above.  Freemond’s note also said that the enclosed partnership             
          Form K-1 would be the last one sent because Stonehurst was being            
          dissolved.                                                                  
               On February 24, 1987, on cross-motions for partial summary             
          judgment in the case under docket No. 33436-84, this Court                  
          granted respondent’s motion and denied Mr. Heitzman’s motion.               
          Heitzman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-109.  We held that, as            
          a matter of law, Mr. Heitzman was not entitled to deduct his                



Page:  Previous  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011