- 7 - Petitioner's Evaluation of Mid Continent Petitioner discussed with Corman the tax benefits he might receive from Mid Continent and as a result, he expected some "flow-throughs" of losses and investment tax credits. Petitioner "read some paperwork" about Mid Continent that included various forms and reports. At the time of his investment petitioner received and reviewed a document that bore the title "Terra Drill". He reviewed a partnership prospectus for Mid Continent, and he produced at trial a document the first page of which is numbered "35" and is entitled "Summary of Partnership Agreement". The second through eleventh and final pages of the document are numbered "B9" through "B18" and discuss solely tax aspects of the partnership. Petitioner also received a subscription agreement for Mid Continent that he reviewed at the time he purchased his interest from Fields. Paragraph 2.(k) at page 3 of the four-page subscription agreement provides in part: I understand that no state or Federal governmental authority has made any finding or determination relating to the fairness for public investment of the Units in the Partnership and that no state or Federal governmental authority has recommended or endorsed, or will recommend or endorse, these Units. Petitioner was aware that Corman did not have a "vast knowledge of oil and gas" matters and that Corman's advice on the Mid Continent partnership was based solely on his reading of the prospectus.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011