-328-
tax benefits from the transaction with a potential value in the
hundreds of million of dollars, it is very unlikely that the
$10,000,000 figure represents the fair market value of the debt.”
Mr. Shapiro’s expert report provides no basis for reaching these
conclusions other than speculation. He did not identify the tax
benefits that he alluded to and, indeed, testified that he based
his conclusions on a discussion with respondent’s counsel
regarding SMP’s “trying to take a writeoff on this debt”.
Similar to other portions of Mr. Shapiro’s report, these
statements have the distinct quality of advocacy.
For the reasons stated above, we conclude that Mr. Shapiro’s
expert report and testimony are not admissible into evidence. We
shall grant petitioner’s motion in limine as it relates to that
expert report and testimony.
B. Mr. Jouannet’s Response
At trial, we admitted a letter from Mr. Lerner dated
November 21, 1997, requesting a confirmation from Mr. Jouannet:
In order to respond to a question asked by our
auditors, we would appreciate receiving a letter from
you confirming that, to the best of your recollection:
(i) when GB and CLIS entered into the Santa Monica
Pictures LLC agreement, they intended at the time to be
partners with Rockport Capital Inc. and (ii) their
decision to dispose of their interests was made
subsequent to the date of that agreement (December 11,
1996). I recall that the interests were transferred at
the end of 1996.
Page: Previous 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011