- 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