Steven K. Stoddard and Ellen M. Stoddard - Page 17




                                       - 17 -                                         
          from theft.9                                                                
               Petitioners attempted to satisfy their burden of proof with            
          respect to the casualty loss deduction claimed for 1997 through             
          Ms. Stoddard’s testimony and 14 photographs of the Quissett that            
          are part of the instant record.  With respect to Ms. Stoddard’s             
          testimony, we found that testimony to be general, conclusory,               
          and/or uncorroborated in certain material respects.  We shall not           
          rely on her testimony to sustain petitioners’ burden of proof               
          with respect to the casualty loss deduction claimed for 1997.               
               With respect to the photographs of the Quissett on which               
          petitioners rely, Ms. Stoddard testified that 12 of the 14                  
          photographs show the Quissett during and after repairs and/or               
          “restoration work” that petitioners undertook before the alleged            
          storm and that 2 of the 14 photographs show the Quissett after              
          the alleged storm caused the damage that petitioners are claim-             
          ing.  The back side of each of 4 of the 12 photographs that Ms.             
          Stoddard testified show the Quissett before the alleged storm               
          contain handwritten notations indicating that each of those                 
          photographs was taken sometime during 1993 and 1994 (i.e., before           
          the alleged storm).  The remaining eight photographs that Ms.               
          Stoddard testified show the Quissett before the alleged casualty            
          do not contain any indication as to when they were taken.  The              

               9Petitioners do not contend that the alleged damage with               
          respect to the Quissett was a loss incurred in a trade or busi-             
          ness or in any transaction entered into for profit.  See sec.               
          165(c)(1) and (2).                                                          




Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011