- 35 -
registration certificates. * * * The answer to the
question is found by determining how many sheep were
available to be purchased by RCR #4 in 1984. If there
were enough animals available for purchase, and the
seller and buyer both acknowledge the transaction, and
the partnership files a tax return reflecting the
transaction, then errors on the Schedule A are not
really significant.
The petitioners do not wish to minimize the fact
that better care should have been taken to prepare
correct and complete Schedule A's for attachment to the
bills of sale. However, it is the bill of sale which
effectuates the transaction, not the Schedule A. Each
bill of sale states a number of sheep purchased and
these are generally reflected in the flock recap
sheets. * * * The Respondent uses many pages of his
brief attacking the Schedule A's and the Petitioners,
acknowledging there are many errors, will not attempt
to convince this Court that an obvious error is somehow
accurate. However, this is not a concession that no
entries in the Schedule A's are accurate.
The parties have stipulated that 3,176 of the
approximately 10,000 animals sold to the partnerships
are found in both the registration certificates and the
Schedule A's. * * * Further, the 1,248 matches that
Respondent calls duplicates are duplicates because they
are reflected on more than one Schedule A. * * *
These animals could clearly have been sold to one
partnership, repossessed and resold to another
partnership. These 1,248 so-called duplicates should
be considered matches by the Court. * * * The
respondent would prefer to impugn [sic] criminal
behavior to the Petitioners before the Respondent would
admit the obvious. * * * there is nothing underhanded
in the Schedule A's. There is just a sloppy job of
data entry. The Respondent wishes to focus on the
Schedule A's. There is good reason to do so (from
Respondent's perspective) for to focus on the
registration certificates can only lead to one
conclusion--there were plenty of animals for each
partnership to purchase.
Before leaving this discussion of Schedule A's,
the Petitioners would like to ask the Court to consider
a couple of questions. If a rancher wishes to buy a
registered animal from one of the partnerships, would
Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011