- 10 -
June 1, 1992. The oral agreement between petitioner and Mr.
Magness, however, required a one-time $40,000 consulting fee to
be paid only when the Corbin project sold. Another example can
be found in petitioner’s testimony that, contrary to the terms of
the Contract, neither he nor Mr. Magness intended for an offset
provision to be included in the Contract.
Both petitioner and Mr. Magness testified that the Contract
and the promissory note, purportedly evidencing their agreement,
did not accurately reflect the agreed-upon terms. In fact, on
brief petitioner points out that “The fact that the parties did
not adhere to the terms of the documents is irrelevant, as the
documents, which were not read by the parties prior to signature,
never reflected the true intent of the parties.” Thus, we give
the documents little weight and determine the outcome of this
case based on the facts and circumstances surrounding the
transaction. See Calumet Indus., Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at
288.
2. Presence or Absence of a Fixed Maturity Date
“The presence of a fixed maturity date indicates a fixed
obligation to repay, a characteristic of a debt obligation. The
absence of the same on the other hand would indicate that
repayment was in some way tied to the fortunes of the business,
indicative of an equity advance.” Estate of Mixon v. United
States, 464 F.2d 394, 404 (5th Cir. 1972); see also sec.
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