- 17 -
develop a business park in Phoenix, Arizona. During 1977 or
1978, Mr. Shedd, Mr. Estes, and others formed Dakota, a
partnership, to hold a piece of land on the south side of Tucson
for future development. Around 1977, Mr. Shedd, Mr. Estes, and
others formed EDC, a partnership. Mr. Shedd was a partner in EDC
until approximately 1982 or 1983. Additionally, from
approximately 1977 until 1981, Mr. Shedd and Mr. Estes were
coowners of Tucson Photo Engraving, a photo-developing
corporation in Tucson.
During 1980, petitioner and Estes Co. shared the same
address. During 1986 and 1987, petitioner had the same address
as did three entities related to Mr. Estes.3 At one time, Estes
Co. personnel kept petitioner's books and prepared petitioner's
income tax returns.
Mr. Shedd, as secretary of petitioner, identified petitioner
as a general partner of Estes Co. in a corporate resolution made
at a board of directors meeting held on February 26, 1985, as
well as in an acknowledgment dated March 8, 1985. The notes to
Estes Co. and Estes Homes Combined Financial Statements for years
ended December 31, 1986 and 1985, identify petitioner, WE 7, and
3 At trial we took under advisement petitioners's relevancy
objections to respondent's Exhibits BG, BH, and BI, upon which
the above findings of fact are based. We find those documents
relevant to the issue of whether the loan was made for a reason
other than for the exclusive benefit of the plan participants and
their beneficiaries and, accordingly, find the disputed exhibits
admissible. Fed. R. Evid. 401, 402.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011