- 4 -
8. Arizona law does empower the trustee with the
right to employ persons, including attorneys and
agents, to assist the trustee in carrying out his
duties. See A.R.S. � 14-7233 C. 24. However, the
petition contains no evidence that Jimmy C. Chisum has
been properly “employed” by the trustee in accordance
with Arizona law.
* * * * * * *
10. In summary, Mr. Chisum lacks the capacity to bring
the instant suit directly on behalf of the trust because he
is not the trustee. Additionally, Mr. Chisum lacks the
capacity to represent the trustee or any other person in
this proceeding because he is not an attorney or * * *
otherwise admitted to practice before this Court.
11. Since the petition in this case was not brought by
a party with proper capacity as required by T.C. Rule 60,
this case should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Petitioners filed a response to respondent’s motion in which
they ask the Court to deny that motion. Petitioners’ response to
respondent’s motion asserts in pertinent part:
As the Petitioner has now appointed John P. Wilde
and Jimmy C. Chisum Trustees individually and not as
agents for Trustee, D. & E. Sword Co. and that D. & E.
Sword Co. has resigned as Trustee (See Notice of Sub-
stitution of Fiduciary filed with this Response) all
actions will be taken by John P. Wilde in his capacity
as Trustee of the Trusts. Since counsel for the Re-
spondent has conceded that a Trustee of an expressed
[sic] trust has the capacity to proceed, the Respon-
dent’s objections have been met and Rule 60(a), Rules
of Practice and Procedure, United States Tax Court
prohibits this Court from dismissing this action for
lack of jurisdiction. John P. Wilde hereby files
herewith the amended petition and ratifies by his
signature below, the Petition originally filed by Mr.
Chisum when he was acting in his capacity as agent for
the former Trustee D. & E. Sword Co.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011