- 402 - Kanter presented no evidence as to whether the funds for payment of the notes were in fact the funds of the Bea Ritch Trusts and, if so, why the payments were made by the Bea Ritch Trusts since the Bea Ritch Trusts were not the makers of the notes. With respect to those checks that were not specifically made out to Cashmere for payment of the notes, the debtors on the notes (the Beach Trust, the BWK Revocable Trust, and Holding Co.) were instructed to transmit checks themselves drafted on their own accounts to Cashmere. Administration Co., in turn, provided these entities with the funds for payment of the notes, which funds are represented by three checks. There is no documentary evidence (promissory notes, payment schedules, canceled checks representing interest or principal payments, or other records) in the record to substantiate that the amounts provided to the Beach Trust, the BWK Revocable Trust, and Holding Co. by Administration Co. for the payment of the notes held by Cashmere were "loans" from the Bea Ritch Trusts, or that such "loans" were paid back. No interest or principal was ever paid in connection with any of the so-called "loans" made by the Bea Ritch Trusts in exchange for payment of the notes held by Cashmere.Page: Previous 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011