- 13 - represented additional remuneration to Sodbury. Petitioner’s objection states in pertinent part: Respondent neglects to state that it was Pepe who added the $535,000 to the value of the LIBOR notes, without informing Brunswick. Petitioner agrees that this valuation resulted in a transfer of wealth from Brunswick to Sodbury, however, it would not be accurate to characterize the inadvertent transfer as “remuneration”. Under the circumstances, we assume that petitioner’s position remains that Brunswick was unaware of the aforementioned fee. In particular, the parties’ first stipulation of facts addressed Merrill Lynch’s valuation of Saba’s LIBOR notes in pertinent part as follows: 265. * * * The valuation letters dated July 13, 1990 [Jt. Ex. 148-J(5)] and August 17, 1990 [Jt. Ex. 148-J(8)] and Saba’s financial statements consistent with such letter included an additional amount of $535,000 added to Merrill’s calculated value of the LIBOR Notes. The valuation letter dated September 14, 1990 [Jt. Ex. 148-J(10)] and Saba’s financial statement consistent with such letter included an additional amount of one-fourth of the $535,000, or $133,750, added to Merrill’s calculated value of the LIBOR Notes. 266. Brunswick contends that it was not aware that the July 13, 1990, August 17, 1990, and September 14, 1990 valuation letters included an additional amount of $535,000 (or a pro rata portion thereof, in the case of the September 14 letter) added to Merrill’s calculated value of the LIBOR Notes. Any references to this additional amount in this Stipulation are not intended as a stipulation that Brunswick was aware of this additional amount. Respondent does not agree with Brunswick’s contention. * * * * * * * 272. For purposes of computing the price of the July 13, 1990 purchase, the partners used Merrill’sPage: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011