- 5 -
determining the capacity of Mr. Wilde to petition this Court.
Under Arizona law, a trustee has the capacity to institute court
proceedings on behalf of a trust and is thus the proper party to
file a petition on behalf of a trust in this Court. See Ariz.
Rev. Stat. Ann. sec. 14-7233.C.25 (West 1995).
Petitioners bear the burden of proving that this Court has
jurisdiction by establishing affirmatively all facts giving rise
to our jurisdiction. See Patz v. Commissioner, 69 T.C. 497, 503
(1977); Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975); Wheeler’s
Peachtree Pharmacy, Inc. v. Commissioner, 35 T.C. 177, 180
(1960); National Comm. to Secure Justice v. Commissioner, 27 T.C.
837, 839 (1957); Consolidated Cos. v. Commissioner, 15 B.T.A.
645, 651 (1929). In order to meet that burden, petitioners must
provide evidence establishing that Mr. Wilde has authority to act
on their behalf. See National Comm. to Secure Justice v.
Commissioner, supra at 839-840; Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v.
Commissioner, 22 B.T.A. 686, 700 (1931).
Petitioners refuse to provide the trust documents to
respondent and to the Court. Petitioners submitted only the
minutes as evidence.2 The minutes purport to be the minutes of
Morgan, Kramer & Strauss L.L.C. Within the minutes, however,
there is a reference to “Stern & Stein” which implies that the
2 At the hearing, petitioners attempted to introduce into
evidence two incomplete documents regarding the trust which were
not accepted.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011