- 23 -
West] is the true owner of the Leased Equipment.
Petitioner testified that he delivered his business records,
checkbooks, and all his assets to the bankruptcy trustee after he
filed for bankruptcy. If petitioner transferred all his assets
to the bankruptcy trustee, then petitioner could not have been
able to sell or transfer the equipment to Dr. West after the
filing of bankruptcy. Petitioner’s own testimony and the
documentary representations concerning ownership of the rental
equipment all point to Dr. West being the owner of the property
prior to petitioner’s filing for bankruptcy.
Additional facts, such as the Settlement Agreement
identifying Dr. West as the lessor of the rental equipment (as an
assignee of Cilena), petitioner testifying that he “assigned” the
rental equipment to Dr. West, a storage space facility being
rented in Dr. West’s name, and Mr. Cotter’s testimony that he
thought Dr. West owned the property further support respondent’s
position. Petitioner testified that his representation in the
Settlement Agreement that Dr. West was the true owner of the
rental equipment was the culmination of a plan on the part of
petitioner, Dr. West, and Mr. Cotter to avoid the sale of the
rental equipment by petitioner’s bankruptcy trustee and that
petitioner is still the true owner of the equipment. We do not
accept petitioner’s self-serving, uncorroborated testimony on
this issue. See Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 77 (1986).
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011