- 33 -
are different from those which determine the liability for
contributions. In any event, there is insufficient evidence in
the record to satisfy respondent's burden of proof in this aspect
of the inurement issue. On this basis, we accept the testimony
of Messrs. O'Donnell and Rosenkranz that they thought the figure
was approximately $300,000 and that this was the figure they used
in the negotiations.6 As a result, we conclude that the purchase
price should be $6,638,120.
The next question is what was the value of the assets
transferred by petitioner to AMH. We think that the best way to
approach this question is to take the September 30, 1981, balance
sheet which was Mr. Sheldrick's starting point and make three
adjustments to reflect: (1) The increase in the amount of cash
and Treasury bills; (2) Mr. Sheldrick's adjustment of $280,000 to
reflect an increase in the value of the hospital land; and (3)
the values of the Belcher Road and County Road #77 real estate
above the value of $581,153 at which they were carried on
petitioner's books.7 If these three adjustments produce an
6 This round figure is quite close to the actual payments
by AMH; i.e., $171,640 for fiscal 1982 and $97,945 (the pro rata
portion of fiscal 1983 payment for the period prior to sale -
220/365 x $162,168), or $269,583.
7 We have concluded that $60,000 attributable to the value
of two vacant lots should not be a separate item because it may
well be that these lots were included in Mr. Shelton's valuation
of the hospital's land, buildings, and improvements.
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011