-11-
T.C. 579, 583 (1951); see also Equitable Trust Co. v. Gallagher, 67
A.2d 50, 55 (Del. Ch. 1949), affd. 77 A.2d 548 (Del. 1950).
Accepting the 1988 deed might not have been beneficial to the State
of Delaware because it might have been construed as an
acknowledgment of petitioners' interest in the disputed land and
thus detrimental to the State's position in the State court action.
Petitioners' recording of the 1988 deed without communicating its
existence to the State attorney who was litigating the State court
action clearly indicates that petitioners never attempted to
effectuate proper delivery to and acceptance by the State.
Accordingly, we hold that petitioners have not established that
they are entitled to any charitable contribution deduction connected
to the 1988 gift land in 1991 or 1992.
_____________________________
A final note. At the time of the purported donation, the
outcome of the State court action was unknown, and the fair market
value6 of petitioners' interest in the 1988 gift land was either
minimal or had mere speculative value. One of respondent's real
estate title experts, Daniel Kristol, testified that a speculator
might have paid a maximum of $5,000 for petitioners' interest in the
6 The parties presented experts who appraised the 1988
gift land as an unencumbered fee simple interest. Respondent's
appraisal expert, Diane R. Maiden, valued the 1988 gift land at
$3.5 million. Petitioners' appraisal expert, Mr. Moynihan, valued
the 1988 gift land at $5.8 million. These appraisals do not
address the fair market value of petitioners' interest in the
1988 gift land because of the questions surrounding petitioners'
interest at the time of the purported donation.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011