Karns Prime & Fancy Food, Ltd. - Page 24

                                       - 24 -                                         
          issue was transferred to petitioner governs our resolution of               
          whether such transfer constitutes a loan.  See id.                          
               Based upon our examination of the entire record before us,             
          we find that the substance of the bargain between petitioner and            
          Super Rite at the time of the transfer to petitioner of the $1.5            
          million at issue17 was that petitioner’s obligation for a given             
          annual period to make the annual payment set forth in the April             
          15, 1999 note would not arise unless and until it materially                
          breached the April 16, 1999 supply agreement with respect to such           
          period.  On that record, we find that at the time of the transfer           
          to petitioner of the $1.5 million at issue petitioner did not               
          have an unconditional obligation to make each of the annual                 
          payments set forth in the April 15, 1999 note.18  We further find           


               17Although the April 15, 1999 note is dated Apr. 15, 1999,             
          it was not until around May 4, 1999, that petitioner received the           
          $1.5 million at issue.  See supra note 10.                                  
               18We have found, based on the testimony of Joseph Della Noce           
          (Mr. Della Noce), an officer of Rich Foods, the parent of Super             
          Rite at the time of the transaction at issue, that Super Rite               
          expected that the customer would satisfy the minimum annual                 
          purchase requirement set forth in the supply agreement, but that            
          Super Rite nonetheless required the customer to execute a note              
          payable to it in the amount of any advanced funds in order to               
          facilitate repayment of all or a portion of such funds in the               
          event that the customer did not satisfy such minimum annual                 
          purchase requirement or otherwise materially breached the supply            
          agreement.  We have also found, based on Mr. Della Noce’s testi-            
          mony, that Super Rite intended that the customer’s obligation to            
          repay funds that it advanced to such customer would arise only if           
          the customer did not satisfy the minimum annual purchase require-           
          ment set forth in the supply agreement or otherwise materially              
          breached that agreement.                                                    





Page:  Previous  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011