Sharon E. Backstrom, Harold J. and Zelma G. Barbret, Virginia Boland, John A. and Theresa A. Cislaghi, Estate of Roger W. Dornbrock, Gary E. and Beverly G. Engel, Hermann K. and Helen W. Enzmann, - Page 18

                                       - 18 -                                         

          Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346 (1975).  Under Michigan law,             
          "an estate is not a proper party to a lawsuit but rather the                
          administrator or executor is the proper party plaintiff or                  
          defendant."  Wright v. Estate of Treichel, 36 Mich. App. 33, 35,            
          193 N.W.2d 394, 395 (1971); see also Cinnamon v. Abner A. Wolf,             
          Inc., 215 F. Supp. 833 (E.D. Mich. 1963) (stating that the death            
          of the plaintiff during the pendency of a private antitrust suit            
          in Federal court sitting in Michigan did not abate the action,              
          and the executor of the deceased plaintiff's estate could be                
          substituted as party plaintiff).  Mrs. Dornbrock was appointed              
          personal representative of her husband's estate by the Probate              
          Court of Wayne County, Michigan, which clearly qualifies her as             
          the proper party to continue the prosecution of Mr. Dornbrock's             
          action before this Court.  This Court ordered that Mr.                      
          Dornbrock's estate and Mrs. Dornbrock, as personal representative           
          of that estate, be substituted for her deceased husband as a                
          petitioner in this case.  This substitution was in compliance               
          with both the rules of this Court and Michigan law.  Mrs.                   
          Dornbrock, therefore, has not convinced this Court that we lack             
          jurisdiction over the estate of her deceased husband in this                
          case.                                                                       
               As was noted in Nordstrom v. Commissioner, supra at 32:                
                    The foregoing makes it clear that the Court's                     
               jurisdiction over a case continues unimpaired by the death             
               of a petitioner and even * * * [in the event that] there is            
               no personal representative appointed to act in the place and           




Page:  Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011