Lee G. Gale - Page 34




                                       - 34 -                                         
          issues caused by his change of position.  See Rule 142(a)(1).               
          Therefore, respondent bears the burden of proving which amounts             
          claimed by Lurie & Zepeda would not have been deductible if paid            
          without contest.                                                            
               Respondent had an opportunity at trial to meet his burden of           
          proof.  Respondent called the custodian of records for Lurie &              
          Zepeda to testify at trial.  Respondent could have questioned the           
          custodian to determine the specific amounts claimed by Lurie &              
          Zepeda at the end of 1992, for which matters the amounts were               
          claimed, and whether each of the matters related to deductible              
          trade or business or investment matters or nondeductible personal           
          matters.  Respondent failed to make the necessary inquiries.                
               It is undisputed that Lurie & Zepeda asserted a claim for              
          legal fees exceeding the United Ready Mixed settlement proceeds.            
          In connection with a later dispute between petitioner and Lurie &           
          Zepeda in May 1995 (after substantial payments had been made to             
          Lurie & Zepeda), Lurie & Zepeda recovered a judgment against                
          petitioner for $796,352.65.                                                 
               The only amount claimed by Lurie & Zepeda that respondent              
          has established would not have been deductible if paid without              
          dispute was the $65,685.34 in legal fees and costs owing as of              
          1995 in connection with petitioner’s divorce.  Legal fees                   
          incurred in connection with petitioner’s divorce generally would            
          not be deductible.  United States v. Patrick, 372 U.S. 53 (1963);           







Page:  Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011