- 18 -
Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Commissioner, 22 B.T.A. 686, 700
(1931).
On the instant record, we find that Herbst Management Trust
in the case at docket No. 9999-00 and Herbst Charitable Trust in
the case at docket No. 10000-00 have failed to establish who has
the authority to act on their behalf in those respective proceed-
ings. We further find on that record that neither of the cases
at docket Nos. 9999-00 and 10000-00 was brought by and with the
full descriptive name of the fiduciary entitled to institute each
such case on behalf of Herbst Management Trust or Herbst Charita-
ble Trust, as the case may be, as required by Rule 60(a)(1). On
the record before us, we conclude that we do not have jurisdic-
tion over the cases at docket Nos. 9999-00 and 10000-00. Accord-
ingly, we shall dismiss those cases for lack of jurisdiction.12
Ms. Herbst and Mr. Herbst
Neither Ms. Herbst nor any authorized representative of Ms.
Herbst appeared at the Court’s Cleveland trial session on October
15, 2001, at the call of these consolidated cases from the
Court’s trial calendar. Neither Mr. Herbst nor any authorized
representative of Mr. Herbst appeared at that calendar call.
At the trial held by the Court in the case at docket No.
12Because we shall dismiss the cases at docket Nos. 9999-00
and 10000-00 for lack of jurisdiction, we shall deny respondent’s
motion in the case at docket No. 9999-00 and respondent’s motion
in the case at docket No. 10000-00.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011