Universal Trust 06-15-90 - Page 2

                                                                                - 2 -- 2 -                                                                                 

                    deficiency in petitioner’s tax, as required by section 62122 and                                                                                       
                    Scar v. Commissioner, 814 F.2d 1363 (9th Cir. 1987), revg. 81                                                                                          
                    T.C. 855 (1983).  Respondent asserts we must dismiss because                                                                                           
                    Jimmy C. Chisum (Mr. Chisum), the person who signed the petition,                                                                                      
                    has not established his capacity to act on behalf of petitioner,                                                                                       
                    as required by Rule 60.3                                                                                                                               
                              We will deny petitioner’s motion and grant respondent’s                                                                                      
                    motion for the reasons set forth below.                                                                                                                

                              2 All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in                                                                                 
                    effect for 1993, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court                                                                                          
                    Rules of Practice and Procedure, unless otherwise specified.                                                                                           
                              3 We note that Mr. Chisum and a myriad of purported “trusts”                                                                                 
                    with which he has claimed to be connected are well known to this                                                                                       
                    Court.  We have dismissed several cases that Mr. Chisum attempted                                                                                      
                    to bring in this Court (including a case concerning petitioner’s                                                                                       
                    income taxes for 1994 and 1995) on the ground asserted by                                                                                              
                    respondent in the case at hand.  See Universal Trust 06-15-90 v.                                                                                       
                    Commissioner, docket No. 18438-99; Banana Moon Trust v.                                                                                                
                    Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-73; Jeff Burger Prods., LLC v.                                                                                           
                    Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-72 (dismissed for lack of                                                                                                
                    jurisdiction because Mr. Chisum, who claimed to be “trustee” of                                                                                        
                    “trust” acting as taxpayer’s tax matters partner, did not have                                                                                         
                    capacity to act on behalf of that “trust”); Bantam Domestic Trust                                                                                      
                    v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-63; Photo Art Mktg. Trust v.                                                                                          
                    Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-57, see also Lipari v.                                                                                                   
                    Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-280 (sec. 6673 penalty imposed on                                                                                        
                    taxpayers who claimed they were unable to obtain records from                                                                                          
                    Mr. Chisum, “trustee” of their “trust”); George v. Commissioner,                                                                                       
                    T.C. Memo. 1999-381 (“trust” of which Mr. Chisum was “trustee”                                                                                         
                    was a sham, and payments received by that “trust” were income of                                                                                       
                    osteopathic physician who performed services that generated the                                                                                        

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011