Ralph E. Wesinger, Jr. and Catherine R. Wesinger - Page 10




                                       - 10 -                                         
          profit objective was lacking.  Hence, according to respondent,              
          petitioners were not entitled to deduct losses sustained in the             
          ranching and rental operations and are liable for the                       
          deficiencies determined by respondent.  We agree with respondent            
          that, on these facts, petitioners failed to establish the                   
          mandatory profit objective.                                                 
                                  Evidentiary Issue                                   
               As a preliminary matter, before addressing the substantive             
          issues related to profit objective, an evidentiary objection                
          raised by respondent must be decided.  Respondent filed a motion            
          in limine to exclude the testimony of petitioners’ expert,                  
          Jonathan Cosby, a certified public accountant.  The Court                   
          permitted petitioners to make an offer of proof and reserved                
          ruling on the admissibility of the evidence.                                
               Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which governs the           
          admissibility of expert testimony, reads as follows:                        
               If scientific, technical, or other specialized                         
               knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand                  
               the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness                
               qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience,                
               training, or education, may testify thereto in the form                
               of an opinion or otherwise.                                            
               Here, Mr. Cosby’s testimony fails to meet this standard.               
          His statements were neither specialized in nature nor helpful to            
          the Court.  His in-court testimony consisted of broad                       
          generalizations (e.g., neither absence of a business plan nor               
          failure to consult with experts necessarily indicates lack of               





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011