- 36 -
and Ulanoff] to tell me what the machine would do and what the
profit would be." Accordingly, we find that petitioner did not
in fact rely on the advice of Ulanoff and Burstein in purchasing
either his Sentinel EPE recycler in 1981 or his Sentinel EPS
recyclers in 1982.
Further, we find that petitioner did not rely on the legal
opinion issued by WMDI in purchasing his Sentinel EPE recycler in
1981. The legal opinion issued by WMDI on October 15, 1981, was
not introduced into evidence at trial, and the contents of such
opinion were not disclosed at trial. We assume that because the
Sentinel EPS recyclers did not exist before 1982, the legal
opinion issued by WMDI on October 15, 1981, pertains to
petitioner's purchase of the Sentinel EPE recycler in 1981. This
being the case, petitioner could not have possibly relied on the
opinion as it was issued on October 15, 1981, approximately 1
week after petitioner purchased his Sentinel EPE recycler. Thus,
we find that petitioner did not, in fact, rely on the legal
opinion issued by WMDI in purchasing the Sentinel EPE recycler in
1981.
Additionally, petitioner failed to argue, either on brief or
at trial, that he relied on the legal opinion issued by Boylan &
Evans in purchasing the Sentinel EPS recyclers. In fact,
petitioner mentioned this opinion only when he was cross-examined
by respondent. On the record before us, petitioner has failed to
persuade us that he relied on the opinion of Boylan & Evans in
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011