- 9 - opinion 749 F.2d 37 (9th Cir. 1984); Hess v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-240. After a review of the Settlement Agreement, and the facts and circumstances surrounding it, we find that for 1992 through 1995, with respect to the $18,120 ($1,510 of each of the $3,000 monthly payments) that was specifically allocated to satisfy the Jury Award, there is no basis to conclude that such recovery was based upon a tort or tort type claim. At the District Court trial, petitioner introduced Mr. Paul A. Randle (Mr. Paul Randle), an economist and professor of finance at Utah State University. Mr. Paul Randle's testimony was offered to establish an economic value for potential loss of income suffered by petitioner. Mr. Paul Randle determined petitioner's economic loss by taking the total economic value of petitioner's earning capacity, adjusted for inflation, based on his historical performance less any actual earnings after petitioner's termination and prior to trial. Mr. Paul Randle determined that petitioner suffered a net economic loss of $159,238. Following the Jury's special verdict, the District Court awarded petitioner that amount in paragraph 5 of the Judgment. In the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed that $1,510 of each of the $3,000 monthly payments was to be paid towards satisfaction of paragraph 5 of the Judgment.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011