- 15 -
and other equipment without hiring expensive machinists and
equipment repairmen.
Again, we note that petitioner purchased for the timber
farm old and used farm and machine shop equipment because it was
much cheaper than purchasing new equipment, because much of the
equipment would not be used frequently on the property, and
petitioner therefore had no need for new equipment, and because
of petitioner's talent and competence in restoring and
maintaining mechanical equipment.
Petitioner was able to acquire from auctions a large
variety of used farm equipment, to restore the equipment, and, as
of the time of trial, in the barns located on the timber farm,
petitioner maintained in excellent condition and stored for use
on the timber farm approximately 30 pieces of old but operational
farm equipment. The parties and their experts are in agreement
as to the excellent restoration and high quality maintenance of
the equipment located on the timber farm.
From the time petitioners purchased the timber farm in June
of 1985, until September 8, 1989, petitioners’ primary residence
was in Orange, California. From September 8, 1989, through the
time of trial, petitioners' primary residence was in Park City,
Utah.
Petitioners traveled to their Oregon timber farm
approximately 4 or 5 times a year, and on each trip petitioners
typically would spend a number of weeks on the timber farm. In
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011