- 66 -
rent to NPI on behalf of Glendon/Aker. Burton testified that
during the arbitration proceedings, it was ERG’s responsibility
to pay Aker’s rent obligation since it was still, at least until
a final resolution was achieved, ERG’s research and development
division.
The arbitrators in their final decision found that “the rent
that should be paid by GMB [Glendon]/Aker to NPI is $2,000 per
month from July 1, 1987 to December 31, 1994 and $2,500 per
month” thereafter. And in fact, Glendon did pay such rent via a
credit to the amount the arbitrators decided Burton owed him.
Respondent argues that ERG had no duty to pay NPI $31,850,
$29,400, $29,400, $31,020, and $41,736 in 1988, 1989, 1990, 1993,
and 1994, respectively, for Aker’s use of the Lowell plant and
that those payments constituted constructive dividends to the
Bensons.59 We agree with respondent that ERG had no contractual
58(...continued)
I knew that the performance on the [unbundling]
agreement required payment of rent. * * * [But it] also
required my brother to advance money to satisfy the
terms of that agreement. I was not going to pay rent
until my brother satisfied his monetary agreement, or
commitments.
59Respondent determined these amounts in the notices of
deficiency. However, in a stipulated exhibit, the parties agreed
that ERG paid NPI $31,850, $26,950, $31,850, $33,840, and $38,296
during the years at issue, respectively, as rent for the Lowell
plant. But see supra p. 25, table, note 1. From the evidence
and argument presented, we cannot determine why there is a
discrepancy between the amounts that respondent determined and
the amounts the parties stipulated. Thus, we assume the parties
(continued...)
Page: Previous 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011