- 15 -
credit card receipts, bank statements, or any other documentation
which would corroborate their argument.
Petitioners, instead, rely on their own testimony and that
of Mr. Fisher and his former wife, Alice. However, this
testimony is contradicted by other evidence. For example, the
amount of monthly mortgage payments that petitioners claim to
have made to Mr. Fisher do not correspond to the original loan
from North Florida National Bank in 1984. Petitioners claim to
have made monthly payments of $350 for approximately 1-1/2 years,
whereas the North Florida National Bank loan required monthly
payments of $244.38 for 5 years. Additionally, Mr. Fisher
executed several loans secured by mortgages on the property. In
each instance, Mr. Fisher purported to be the true owner. Mr.
Fisher also applied for the construction permit which authorized
the construction of the house on parcel 1 during 1988. Finally,
during Mr. and Mrs. Fisher's divorce proceedings, parcel 1 was
treated as marital property and awarded to Mr. Fisher.
Mr. Fisher's actions were consistent with true ownership.
Petitioners failed to present documentation corroborating their
payment for the property. Petitioners have not presented clear,
strong, and unequivocal evidence of a resulting trust. Indeed,
the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that Mr.
Fisher was the owner of the property prior to June 6, 1991.
The fair market value of the property transferred on the
date of transfer must be determined to find the extent of
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011