- 10 -
deeds, and other documents admitted into evidence8 indicate that
the Fam-Trust owned the property, that the decedent was the sole
beneficiary of the Fam-Trust, and that Joseph S. Maniglia was the
trustee of the Fam-Trust.
The estate contends that Joseph S. Maniglia obtained a 50
percent pro rata share of the proceeds when the property was
refinanced and that he contributed the $25,000 in cash towards
the purchase of the property.9 However, the estate has failed to
offer any documentary evidence corroborating its contentions.
The only evidence the estate offered to counter the documentary
evidence showing the decedent was the sole beneficial owner of
the property was the self-serving testimony of Joseph S. Maniglia
and the vague testimony of his wife.10 Joseph S. Maniglia
8 We note that the record contains partnership returns that
were filed in the name of “Family Trust”. Schedule L, Balance
Sheets, of the Form 1065, U.S. Partnership Return of Income, did
not list the property as a partnership asset. In fact, no
partnership assets were listed on any of the Schedules L admitted
into evidence. The partnership claimed on Schedule B that it was
not required to complete Schedule L because: The partnership’s
total receipts for that year were less than $250,000; the
partnership’s total assets at the end of the year were less than
$600,000; and Schedules K-1 were filed with the return and
furnished to the partners on or before the due date for the
partnership return.
9 At trial, Joseph S. Maniglia conceded that there is no
documentation proving that he contributed $25,000 in cash.
10 Joseph S. Maniglia’s wife, Linda Maniglia, testified
that, after graduating from college, she and Joseph S. Maniglia
both worked as teachers, lived in an inexpensive apartment, and
maintained a modest lifestyle in order to save money. Mrs.
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011