- 44 -
With respect to the additional requirement of Ohio law that,
in order to pass title, there must be delivery of a properly
executed deed, Wayne Bldg. & Loan Co. of Wooster v. Yarborough,
supra, on the record before us, we find that that additional
requirement was not satisfied on December 31, 1999 (or at any
other time in 1999). We have found that KQC did not deliver the
bill of sale to TMC until March 27, 2000.18
We have found on the record before us that petitioners in
each of these cases have failed to carry their burden of estab-
lishing that on December 31, 1999 (or at any other time in 1999)
KQC made an irrevocable transfer to TMC of legal title to the
improved property on Maple Street or to any portion of such
property. On that record, we further find that petitioners in
each of these cases have failed to carry their burden of estab-
lishing that all of the essential elements of a bona fide inter
vivos gift were present on December 31, 1999 (or at any other
time in 1999) with respect to KQC’s claimed noncash charitable
contribution to TMC.19
18On brief, petitioners acknowledge that TMC did not receive
the bill of sale from KQC until Mar. 27, 2000. We rejected above
petitioners’ suggestion that the general warranty deed pertaining
to the improved property on Maple Street that Mr. Kaplan executed
on behalf of KQC on Mar. 13, 2001, relates back to the bill of
sale and thereby effected in 1999 an irrevocable transfer by KQC
to TMC of legal title to such property or any portion of such
property. See supra note 16.
19Consequently, we need not address whether on Dec. 31, 1999
(or at any other time in 1999) the remaining essential elements
(continued...)
Page: Previous 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011