- 19 - was vested with authority to institute this action on behalf of Residential Management is lacking. Therefore, we shall dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction consistent with respondent’s motion.16 All of the arguments and contentions that have not been analyzed herein have been considered but do not require any further discussion. In order to give effect to the foregoing, An order of dismissal for lack of jurisdiction will be entered. 16 Robert Hogue is no stranger to this Court and has filed numerous petitions with the Court on behalf of various so-called trusts. As is the case here, those petitions were dismissed on the ground that they were not filed by a proper party. See Bella Vista Chiropractic Trust v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-8; Deschutes Rd. Trust v. Commissioner, T.C. Sum. Op. 2003-4; Acme Equip. Trust v. Commissioner, T.C. Sum. Op. 2003-3; Remedios Chiropractic Clinic Trust, docket No. 11070-01; JREP Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 9795-01L; PERJ Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 9794-01L; CSM Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 9796- 01L; Family Chiropractic Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 7378- 01; R&R Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 7379-01S; PERJ Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 6727-01; JREP Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 6726-01; MARFRAN Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 12427-00S; Remedios Chiropractic Clinic Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 12426-00; BLR-SLR Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 12425-00S; Rancho Residential Facility Trust v. Commissioner, docket No. 9120-00; 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.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Last modified: May 25, 2011