River City Ranches #1 Ltd., Leon Shepard, Tax Matters Partner - Page 61

                                        - 46 -                                         
               Although Jay Hoyt’s indictment dealt with fraud perpetrated             
          against individual investors through the use of cattle                       
          partnerships only, the judgment ordered restitution to all the               
          partners in the cattle and sheep partnerships.  By definition,               
          restitution is the “act of making good or giving equivalent for              
          any loss, damage, or injury.”  Black’s Law Dictionary 1180 (5th              
          ed. 1979).  Further, a general obligation exists for a person who            
          defrauds another to make restitution to the person defrauded.                
          Kreimer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-672.  Accordingly, the              
          U.S. District Court would not have ordered Jay Hoyt to pay                   
          restitution to the sheep partners had they not been victims of               
          his crimes.  Moreover, in Jay Hoyt’s appeal of his conviction, he            
          did not argue that the U.S. District Court erred by including the            
          sheep partners in the restitution order.  See United States v.               
          Hoyt, supra.                                                                 
               Because the sheep partners were included in the restitution             
          order and all the sheep partnerships were formed, organized, and             
          operated in essentially the same fashion as the cattle                       
          partnerships, we conclude that Jay Hoyt defrauded the individual             
          investors in the nine sheep partnerships in the same manner that             
          he was convicted of defrauding the individual investors in the               
          cattle partnerships.                                                         
               Petitioners state that the “conviction established Hoyt’s               
          theft from all his partners and partnerships.”  Petitioners                  






Page:  Previous  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011