- 17 -
set forth in the purported trust instrument are associated with
the day-to-day management affairs of the business. Thus, the
director’s responsibilities appear to be nothing more than those
of a business manager.
Indeed, the first time Mr. Adorno claimed to be trustee for
Adorno Business was in his response dated October 17, 2002, to
the Court’s order for production of documents evidencing Mr.
Adorno’s capacity as the purported “trustee” of Adorno Business.
With the exception of the response, Mr. Adorno continually
referred to himself as director and signed all relevant documents
as director of Adorno Business. Without clear evidence in the
purported trust instrument, we are unpersuaded that the term
“director” is synonymous with the term “trustee” to accord Mr.
Adorno the status of trustee. Accordingly, we conclude that Mr.
Adorno is not the duly appointed trustee of Adorno Business
pursuant to Illinois law.
In the absence of any persuasive basis for concluding that
Mr. Adorno was duly appointed as trustee for Adorno Business, we
shall dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction consistent with
respondent’s motion.
All of the arguments and contentions that have not been
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011