- 17 -
RESPONDENT: You however in presenting this
opposition to the Court, made no representation
anywhere in this document, that the trust instrument
that you presented, was altered from the, at least,
earlier version. You did not draw the Court’s
attention to the fact that you had altered the
document.
ROBERT HOGUE: Is there any law that says I had to?
Did the Court demand me to?
RESPONDENT: Can you answer the question?
ROBERT HOGUE: No, I did not.
Robert Hogue thus claims that as the trustee for Residential
Management, he was authorized to alter the 1994 trust instrument,
and that in his capacity as trustee, he added the provision
authorizing the resigning trustee to appoint a successor
trustee.14 By Robert Hogue’s own admission, he created the
altered trust instrument after his purported appointment as
trustee. Therefore, we conclude that the altered trust
instrument is not relevant to the present case.
We have grave doubts about the authenticity of the altered
trust instrument. However, assuming arguendo that it was created
before July 15, 1997, this does not help Robert Hogue. No
14 At the hearing, Robert Hogue testified indignantly that
he could not recall when he created the altered trust instrument.
However, the record suggests that the altered trust instrument
may have been created after this Court’s trial session in
Residential Mgmt. Servs. Trust v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-
297, held on June 5, 2000, wherein the Court rested its decision
on the fact that paragraph Eighth of the 1994 trust instrument
did not authorize the resigning trustee to appoint a successor
trustee.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011