- 6 -
3. Upon commencement of the examination, respon-
dent requested a copy of all documents relating to the
trust. Petitioner requested that respondent first
proves [sic] jurisdiction over a Pure Trust in order to
make such a request. Respondent has failed on all
requests to present to the petitioner any documents or
proof that respondent has authority to examine the
records or documentation of Legal-Ease, A Trust.
Respondent is now using the Motion to Dismiss for Lack
of Jurisdiction in an effort to force petitioner to
hand over to respondent, records and documents it is
not entitled to have.
4. Respondent has recognized James R. Slagle as a
Trustee of Legal-Ease, A Trust for many years.
Respondent routinely addresses all correspondence to
“Legal-Ease, A Trust; James R. Slagle, Trustee”. * * *
The Court held a hearing on respondent’s motion, at which
Mr. Slagle and Mr. Buchanan appeared on behalf of petitioner.1
Respondent introduced into evidence the 1994 return filed by
petitioner. Petitioner proffered no evidence, and the parties
presented no new arguments, at that hearing.
Discussion
Rule 602 provides in pertinent part:
(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 by and with the full descriptive name of the
fiduciary entitled to institute a case on behalf of
1At the hearing, the Court informed Mr. Slagle and Mr.
Buchanan that its allowing them to appear at the hearing as the
alleged trustees of petitioner did not mean that the Court agreed
that they in fact were petitioner’s duly appointed and authorized
trustees.
2All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice
and Procedure.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011