From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Common Horizons Trust v. Heidemann

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Apr 11, 2006
No. CV 06-0003-PCT-JAT (D. Ariz. Apr. 11, 2006)

Opinion

No. CV 06-0003-PCT-JAT.

April 11, 2006


ORDER


On January 3, 2006, Chester A. Stone, IV, filed a Petition to Quash Summons, purportedly on behalf of Plaintiff, Common Horizons Trust. Mr. Stone claims to be a Trustee of Common Horizons Trust. The Court does not have a copy of the Trust document.

On January 30, 2006, this Court entered an order to show cause directing Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed because a trust, as an entity, is required to have counsel to appear in Federal court. Mr. Stone responded on behalf of Plaintiff arguing that, "The Trust itself is the real party in interest. Plaintiff's trustees are contracted directly to their Trust and thus fully integrated with and into it." Doc. #5 at 5. Mr. Stone also states, "Plaintiff's beneficiaries have no control whatsoever and thus as regards this matter are not real parties in interest." Id. What is clear from these statements is that Plaintiff Trust has multiple trustees and multiple beneficiaries; such beneficiaries may or may not have a present interest in the trust.

In C.E. Pope Equity Trust v. United States, 818 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1987), the Court of Appeals held that a trust could not appear in Federal court without licensed counsel. Id. at 697-98. Mr. Stone attempted to distinguish this case from Pope on the theory that in Pope, the Trustee bringing the suit was not the real party in interest; conversely, Mr. Stone argues that as Trustee he is the real party interest in this case.

The Court rejects Mr. Stone's attempts to distinguish Pope. In this case, like Pope, the Court does not know the identities of the beneficiaries of the Trust, who are most likely the real parties in interest to the property of the Trust. Further, this Court does not know if Mr. Stone even represents a majority of Trustee of the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Court does not find Mr. Stone to be the real party in interest; and thus, finds this case to be indistinguishable from Pope. Therefore, Plaintiff having failed to show cause why this case should not be dismissed,

IT IS ORDERED that this case is dismissed, without prejudice, because a Trust may not appear in Federal court without licensed counsel representing the Trust entity.


Summaries of

Common Horizons Trust v. Heidemann

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Apr 11, 2006
No. CV 06-0003-PCT-JAT (D. Ariz. Apr. 11, 2006)
Case details for

Common Horizons Trust v. Heidemann

Case Details

Full title:Common Horizons Trust, Plaintiff, v. Dan Heidemann, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Apr 11, 2006

Citations

No. CV 06-0003-PCT-JAT (D. Ariz. Apr. 11, 2006)