Estate of Sylvia Gore, Donor, Deceased, Pamela Powell, Personal Representative - Page 43




                                       - 43 -                                         
               2.  the transfer of Marital Fund assets having a value of              
          $100,000 to the Michael Gore Trust for no consideration;                    
               3.  the transfer of the balance of the Marital Fund assets             
          to GFLP to be allocated equally to the capital accounts of GFLP’s           
          three limited partners:  the Sylvia Gore Revocable Trust, the               
          Michael Gore Trust, and the Pamela Powell Trust.41                          
          Because the parties disagree regarding whether the alleged                  
          transfer to GFLP was completed before decedent died on June 12,             
          1997,42 we must first decide whether decedent effectively                   
          withdrew the Marital Fund assets from the Marital Fund and, if              
          she did, whether decedent completed any transfers of Marital Fund           
          assets during her lifetime.                                                 
               B.  The Parties’ Arguments                                             
               Petitioner argues that decedent’s execution of the                     
          assignment on January 8, 1997, was sufficient under Oklahoma law            
          to withdraw all of the Marital Fund assets from the Marital Fund            


               41Petitioner argues in petitioner’s posttrial briefs that,             
          contrary to the wording of the assignment, the assignment                   
          resulted in decedent’s transferring all of the Marital Fund                 
          assets to GFLP in exchange for a 98-percent limited partnership             
          interest.  Petitioner contends that decedent then made gifts of             
          GFLP limited partnership interests to decedent’s children’s                 
          trusts.  We find no credible evidence in the record to support              
          petitioner’s construction of the assignment and petitioner’s                
          description of the transfer the assignment allegedly effected,              
          and we do not discuss this aspect of petitioner’s arguments                 
          further.                                                                    
               42Respondent does not challenge the status of the alleged              
          transfers to the children’s trusts as completed gifts.                      





Page:  Previous  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007