- 6 - documentary evidence of a loan from Aeberhard. Petitioner contends that he has no documentary evidence because his European investors did not require more than a handshake for transactions with him. Petitioner's claim is inconsistent with other evidence in the record. Petitioner gave Aeberhard a promissory note for the $200,000 loan in 1990 and secured it with a mortgage. This casts doubt on petitioner's claim that Aeberhard would have required nothing more than a handshake for a loan in 1989. We find that Aeberhard did not lend $200,000 to petitioner in 1989. 2. Whether Petitioner's Investors Authorized Him To Use Their Funds for Personal Purposes Petitioner's investors made numerous deposits in his accounts in 1989. Petitioner stated that he borrowed surplus money from investors' funds to invest in a "good deal" on several occasions when he was short of cash. Petitioner contends that his foreign investors knew and did not mind that he used some of their funds to invest for his own purposes. He contends that he could use those funds for personal investments, in part because he was not paid for his work and had overhead costs. However, he concedes that he had no written authority to do so. He contends that he repaid those funds as soon as the project for which they were intended needed them. We disagree. Markmann stated that petitioner could use "small amounts" to pay for office expenses. We believe thatPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011