Quantum Company Trust - Page 12




                                       - 12 -                                         
          of Alaska testified that she viewed the settlement as a compromise          
          of property-based claims.                                                   
               From the face of the release agreement we are unable to                
          ascertain whether the settlement was made on account of tort type           
          personal injuries or in claims grounded elsewhere; the release              
          agreement purports to release defendants from “all actions, causes          
          of action, suits, controversies, claims, and demands of every kind          
          and nature”.  Nor are we able to discern from the face of the               
          release agreement the intent of the parties in reaching the                 
          agreement; the release agreement provided “it is the intention of           
          the parties released * * * and it is the purpose of this agreement,         
          to discharge absolutely the liability of the parties * * * from any         
          and all the aforementioned claims”.  Accordingly, we must analyze           
          the nature of the underlying claims.                                        
               First, we address whether the settlement was made on account           
          of tort or tort type rights.  This analysis requires us to focus on         
          the scope of remedies available.  See Cade v. Commissioner, T.C.            
          Memo. 1999-394.  “A ‘tort’ has been defined broadly as a ‘civil             
          wrong other than breach of contract, for which the court will               
          provide a remedy in the form of an action for damages.’”  United            
          States v. Burke, 504 U.S. 229, 234 (1992) (quoting Keeton et al.,           
          Prosser & Keeton on the Law of Torts 2 (5th ed. 1984)).  Such               
          action for damages is generally compensatory in nature.  See id. at         
          235.                                                                        






Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011