- 22 -
As stated above, because David came into actual possession of
his father's assets, David is the statutory executor of Sloan’s
estate pursuant to section 2203. As such, he was the proper
individual to receive the notices of deficiency under section 6212.
Accordingly, we hold that the notices of deficiency giving rise to
docket Nos. 24986-97 and 24987-97 are valid.
We now turn to whether David had authority to petition the
Court on behalf of Sloan’s estate. David argues that because no
fiduciary of Sloan’s estate had been appointed, he improperly filed
the petitions in docket Nos. 24986-97 and 24987-97. We disagree.
As stated supra, David was the statutory executor of Sloan’s estate
pursuant to section 2203. As such, pursuant to Rule 60,4 David had
authority to contest the notices of deficiency involved in docket
Nos. 24986-97 and 24987-97.
4 Rule 60(a) provides in pertinent part:
Rule 60. Proper Parties; Capacity
(a) Petitioner: (1) Deficiency or
Liability Actions: A case shall be brought
by and in the name of the person against whom
the Commissioner determined the deficiency
(in the case of a notice of deficiency) or
liability (in the case of a notice of
liability), or by and with the full
descriptive name of the fiduciary entitled to
institute a case on behalf of such person. *
* *
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011