- 24 -24
continued to engage in mining activities. The Court considered
whether the expenses of carrying on mining activities were
deductible as administration expenses. Because of the difficulty
in ascertaining the nature of the assets in the estate, and
because of the difficulty in expeditiously disposing of the bulk
of the assets, the Court found that the expenses were incurred in
connection with the protection or preservation of the estate.
We are convinced that the Trust's continuation of the
ranching business was necessary for the preservation of the
estate and was a necessary step in liquidating the estate's
assets. The experts consulted by Messrs. Lanier and Pearce
unanimously recommended that, in order to preserve value of the
land, the cattle on the ranch not be sold. Mr. Malone, an
employee of the Water District, which had no interest in the
outcome of this issue, similarly testified that the Fishbranch
land would be likely to revert to muck and swamp if the cattle
grazing on it were sold. We also acknowledge the trustee's
difficulty in disposing of Fishbranch after its lack of access
was revealed, which further prevented its expeditious sale, and
the fact that the value of the Fishbranch parcel remaining after
the first Fishbranch sale, when the cattle finally were sold, did
depreciate in value, as compared with the price obtained on the
first Fishbranch sale. We therefore hold that the expenses
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011