- 10 -
parties stipulated that compensation information for TYE January
31, 1991, to January 31, 1998, was admissible, and, in accordance
with the parties’ stipulation, we admitted that part of Exhibit
17-J containing compensation information for those years.
Respondent points out that the issue is not whether historical
compensation information is or might be relevant; the issue is
how much historical compensation information is admissible.
Petitioners have not shown that the ruling excluding that part of
Exhibit 17-J containing compensation information for taxable
years ended before January 31, 1991, is an abuse of our
discretion.
In support of their argument, petitioners contend that we
relied in Menard I on the unadmitted part of Exhibit 17-J. In
their motion, petitioners focus on two factual statements in
Menard I. The first is that Mr. Menard has received an annual
bonus since 1973, slip op. at 12, and the second is that the 5-
percent bonus generally increased each year, slip op. at 63.
Petitioners link the two statements together and claim that the
Court must have relied on the unadmitted part of Exhibit 17-J to
make them. Petitioners’ claim is inaccurate. Our statement that
Mr. Menard has received an annual bonus since 1973 is supported
by Exhibit 16-J, by the uncontroverted testimony of Al Pitterle,
and by paragraph 44 of the stipulation of facts. Our statement
that the 5-percent bonus “generally increased each year” is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011