- 68 -
after Northwest had succeeded in tracing the funds and forcing
them into custodial accounts governed by the TRO. Thus, these
recordations–-the earliest of which occurred in August 1988–-are
not probative regarding whether petitioner was holding the funds
as an agent before his actions were mandated by the TRO.40
Petitioner’s vigorous efforts to keep the funds that he had
taken from corporate accounts hidden from Northwest, even when
these actions harmed his corporations, also persuade us that
petitioner exercised personal dominion and control over those
funds in 1988. In one instance, petitioner may have voluntarily
disclosed diverted corporate funds to Northwest; namely, when the
$271,836 identified by petitioner’s attorney as the proceeds of
the “Gerber account” was transferred from P-B No. 2 to ANB No. 2
on May 26, 1988, in connection with petitioner’s attorney’s
proposal to secure petitioner’s release from liability under the
Guaranty and Interim Agreement.41 However, in line with our
40 Respondent objected at trial to the admission of the
workpapers on grounds of authenticity, hearsay, and completeness.
We reserved ruling on those objections. In a separate order, we
have overruled respondent’s objections and admitted the
workpapers as evidence. However, in our view, the workpapers are
not probative regarding petitioner’s intentions or agency, and we
do not rely on them in reaching our findings.
41 Whether petitioner voluntary disclosed to Northwest his
purchase of the Gerber stock with his corporations’ funds or
Northwest’s auditors instead traced the transaction is not clear
from the record. In view of the record as a whole, however, the
latter is much more likely.
Page: Previous 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011