-19-
We hold that the DRO did not render HBW a payor of last
resort under the applicable law.10 Instead, the person who bears
the risk of loss on a default on LCL’s recourse obligations is
LCL’s recourse creditor itself. Such a fact is not surprising,
however, in that it is that creditor that chose to deal with LCL
in its status as a limited liability company and through the
terms of the promissory notes agreed to seek repayment solely
from the assets of LCL rather than also from the assets of one or
more of LCL’s members. We have considered all arguments by
petitioner for a holding contrary to that which we reach herein
and have concluded that those arguments not mentioned herein are
irrelevant or without merit. Accordingly,
Decision will be entered
as previously entered on
September 28, 2005.
10 Even if we had concluded that the DRO did render HBW a
payor of last resort, we would have held against petitioner in
that it has failed to prove the amount of any additional loss
that it is entitled to deduct in this case.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Last modified: March 27, 2008