- 5 -
Section 10., MR. HOGUE also presented notarized
documentation to the court to show his acceptance of
Trusteeship. As well as further documentation such as
form 56, Fiduciary Signature card showing Robert Hogue
as wet signature on bank account. At best this site is
frivolous and without merit. The court is trying to
mislead the petitioner in this court action. ROBERT
HOGUE is the only person who can represent the trust.
His description as Trustee for Rancho Residential Trust
is well established in his everyday work as Trustee.
Attached to the objection are copies of, inter alia, a
purported trust instrument dated August 15, 1996, and a document
entitled “Trustee Resignation/Appointment of Successor-Trustee”
dated July 15, 1997 (appointment document).5
The purported trust instrument provides, in pertinent part,
as follows:
5 The same purported trust instrument and appointment
document were both submitted to the Court by Robert Hogue in
Rancho Residential Facility Trust v. Commissioner, docket No.
9120-00, involving the 1996 tax year, which was dismissed on the
ground that Robert Hogue was not a proper person authorized to
petition the Court on behalf of the trust. Likewise, with the
exception of the name of the so-called trust, the appointment
document is identical to the appointment document submitted to
the Court by Robert Hogue in numerous cases before this Court
that were dismissed on the ground that Robert Hogue was not a
proper person authorized to petition the Court on behalf of the
“trust”. See Rancho Residential Facility Trust v. Commissioner,
supra; Residential Mgmt. Servs. Trust v. Commissioner, docket No.
9119-00; Home Health Servs. Trust v. Commissioner, docket No.
9118-00; Sunshine Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 9117-00;
Residential Mgmt. Servs. Trust v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-
297; cases cited supra n.2.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011