- 13 -
in Mr. Henderson. Additionally, there were no set maturity dates
or security pledged for the alleged loans. Mr. Smith also
testified that no bank would consider making a loan to
petitioner.
As to the lone $9,000 promissory note, whether it represents
a legitimate debt instrument is irrelevant to the disposition of
whether the payments of Mr. Henderson’s personal expenses by
petitioner are repayments of loans made between the two parties.
Petitioner has shown no evidence that any of the personal
expenses paid on behalf of Mr. Henderson represented repayment of
the $9,000 promissory note. The $9,000 promissory note has a
“Satisfaction” clause reserved at the top of the promissory note
so that the date on which the promissory note was satisfied in
full could be documented by date and signature. Nothing on the
face of the $9,000 promissory note indicates that any of the
payments of Mr. Henderson’s personal expenses were in
satisfaction of the alleged debt.
In this case, there is no objective evidence that any of the
personal expenses paid by petitioner on behalf of Mr. Henderson
represented repayment of loans between Mr. Henderson and the
corporation. Accordingly, we hold that none of the personal
expenses paid by petitioner on behalf of Mr. Henderson
represented repayment of loans made by him to the corporation.
This Court must now decide whether the payments of Mr.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011