- 18 -
On December 3, 2001, the Court sua sponte issued separate
Orders (December 3, 2001 Show Cause Orders) directing each party
in the case at docket No. 9999-00 in which Herbst Asset Manage-
ment Trust is named as petitioner and in the case at docket No.
10000-00 in which Herbst Charitable Trust is named as petitioner
to
show cause in writing why the Court has jurisdiction
over this case, including the identity of any purported
fiduciary of petitioner and a detailed analysis of why
such purported fiduciary has the capacity to litigate
in the Court on behalf of petitioner.
On December 19, 2001, respondent filed separate written
responses to the December 3, 2001 Show Cause Orders in the cases
at docket Nos. 9999-00 and 10000-00 in which respondent con-
tended, inter alia, that Herbst Management Trust and Herbst
Charitable Trust, respectively,
11. * * * failed to establish that a trustee, if
authorized, acted on its behalf when the purported
petition was filed with the Court on September 25,
2000.
12. * * * failed to file a proper petition with
this Court in that the petition was not brought by and
with the full descriptive name of the fiduciary enti-
tled to institute a case on its behalf.
Respondent further argued in those separate responses to the
December 3, 2001 Show Cause Orders in the cases at docket Nos.
9999-00 and 10000-00 that
Since the petition in this case was not brought by a
party with proper capacity as required by the Tax Court
Rules of Practice and Procedure, the Court lacks juris-
diction * * *.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011