- 18 -- 18 -
also claims that he was petitioner’s trustee when he signed the
petition in February 1998 and that he has been petitioner’s
trustee throughout this proceeding.
We conclude that Mr. Chisum has not shown that he was
petitioner’s trustee (or that he otherwise had authority to
commence litigation on behalf of petitioner) when he signed the
petition or at any other time. Our conclusion is based on the
following aspects of the record.
First, many of the documents Mr. Chisum has submitted to the
Court contradict his claim that he personally has been
petitioner’s trustee since 1997. For example, Mr. Chisum signed
the petition as “Managing Agent for Trustee”, not as “Trustee”;
the caption placed on the petition by Mr. Chisum identified the
“Petitioner” as “UNIVERSAL TRUST 06-15-90" without identifying
the trustee. Shortly after the petition was filed, the Court on
its own motion changed the caption of the case at hand to the
following: “Universal Trust 06-15-90, Four WS TT01, Trustee,
Petitioner v. Commissioner”. Mr. Chisum did not object to the
Court’s identification of Four WS TT01 as petitioner’s trustee,
either when the Court changed the caption or at any later time.
Moreover, Mr. Chisum continued to sign documents submitted to the
Court above the typewritten names “Four WS TT01, Trustee” or
“Agent for Trustee”. Mr. Chisum did not file a motion or other
document identifying himself as trustee until after the hearing
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011