YMO Trust - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         

          Mr. Jablonski who holds that title.6  Nor is petitioner’s trustee           
          a party to this proceeding.  We infer from the record that                  
          petitioner’s trustee is Robert Buckley, and the petition that was           
          filed with the Court by Mr. Jablonski makes no reference to Mr.             
          Buckley.                                                                    
               Petitioner has left us unpersuaded that we have jurisdiction           
          over its case.  Thus, we shall grant respondent’s motion to                 
          dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.7  See AL Trust v.               
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-276; BHC Trust v. Commissioner,               
          T.C. Memo. 2000-274; Malvern Hills Trust v. Commissioner, T.C.              



          6 By contrast, the trust instrument provides explicitly that                
          “THE TRUSTEES shall hold all property of the Trust Organization             
          as joint tenants in fee simple and shall comprise the Board of              
          Trustees for conducting the affairs of the Trust Organization.”             
          The trust instrument provides further that “THE TRUSTEES shall              
          hold office and exercise collectively the control of the Trust              
          Organization property and affairs.  All major actions and                   
          decisions * * * on the part of the Trust Organization shall be              
          made by the Trustees acting unanimously”.                                   
               We also note that the record contains a document dated Apr.            
          28, 1994, entitled “MINUTES OF THE INITIAL TRUSTEE MEETING OF YMO           
          TRUST.”  This document provides that the managing director is               
          authorized to “conduct day to day routine business”.  This                  
          document provides further that the managing director must receive           
          board approval for any important matter; e.g., a legal                      
          determination.                                                              
          7 Petitioner has also failed to persuade us that it actually                
          existed on the date of the petition.  We lack jurisdiction when a           
          petitioning trust is a nonexisting entity, and such is the case             
          where a trust lacks a corpus.  See Patz v. Commissioner, 69 T.C.            
          497, 501 (1977).  The record leads us to believe that petitioner            
          has no corpus.                                                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011