- 84 -
not, rely.36 On the record before us, we find that petitioner
has failed to carry his burden of establishing that the April 30,
1992 deposit at issue represented a personal loan from Mr.
Ferrer.
With respect to the June 26, 1992 deposit at issue of
$7,000, petitioner contends that that deposit, which we have
found was derived from two checks from Amuke Business Association
totaling $7,000, represented a personal loan from Amuke Business
36Assuming arguendo that petitioner had established that Mr.
Ferrer’s funds were used to purchase the $15,000 Great Western
Bank cashier’s check in question, on the instant record, we find
that petitioner has failed to carry his burden of showing that
that cashier’s check represented a loan to petitioner from Mr.
Ferrer. To support his contention that that check represented a
loan, petitioner relies on his self-serving testimony and the
testimony of Mr. Vulis. We are not required to, and we shall
not, rely on petitioner’s testimony. Although Mr. Vulis testi-
fied that Mr. Ferrer made a $15,000 loan to petitioner and
although we found Mr. Vulis to be credible on that point, his
testimony does not establish the date of that loan, nor does his
testimony show that the $15,000 Great Western Bank cashier’s
check that was used to make the Apr. 30, 1992 deposit at issue
represented the loan from Mr. Ferrer to which Mr. Vulis was
referring in his testimony. As stated above, the only evidence
in the record as to whether that deposit was made with the
proceeds of a $15,000 loan from Mr. Ferrer is petitioner’s self-
serving testimony, on which we are not required to, and we shall
not, rely. We note that petitioner did not call Mr. Ferrer as a
witness and did not offer into evidence any credible documentary
evidence regarding the alleged loan from Mr. Ferrer. We infer
from petitioner’s failure to call Mr. Ferrer that Mr. Ferrer’s
testimony would not have been favorable to petitioner’s conten-
tion that the $15,000 Great Western Bank cashier’s check that was
used to make the Apr. 30, 1992 deposit at issue represented a
loan from Mr. Ferrer. We infer from petitioner’s failure to
proffer any credible documentary evidence regarding the alleged
$15,000 loan from Mr. Ferrer that any such evidence does not
exist and that, if any such evidence does exist, it would not
have substantiated petitioner’s position regarding that alleged
loan.
Page: Previous 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011