Opinion
20222-21S
05-22-2023
DANIEL LEON LAUFERSWILER, DECEASED, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Adam B. Landy, Special Trial Judge
On June 8, 2021, a petition was filed in this case seeking a redetermination of a deficiency in income tax for taxable years 2017 and 2018. This case was previously set for trial at the Court's New York, New York session commencing on October 11, 2022. On September 16, 2022, the Commissioner filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Properly Prosecute arguing that Mr. Lauferswiler had been nonresponsive to his communication attempts to resolve this case. During a hearing on October 11, 2022, the Commissioner announced, upon information and belief, that Mr. Lauferswiler passed away on September 30, 2020, prior to the date respondent issued the notice of deficiency. Consequently, the Court denied the Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Properly Prosecute as moot, but granted the Commissioner's oral Motion for Continuance to allow him to investigate whether there is a next of kin or another person present to represent Mr. Lauferswiler's estate in these proceedings.
It is well settled that, unless the petition is filed by Mr. Lauferswiler, or by someone lawfully authorized to act on his behalf, we are without jurisdiction. See Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348-349 (1975); see also Rule 60(a), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. In pertinent part, Rule 60(c) provides that "[t]he capacity of a fiduciary or other representative to litigate in the Court shall be determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction from which such person's authority is derived." A petitioner must show fiduciary authority to institute a case on behalf of a deceased taxpayer in circumstances where a notice of deficiency was issued post-death for an income tax liability that arose prior to death, as is the case in the instant proceeding. Fehrs, 65 T.C. at 349.
The record does not establish that the petition was filed by an individual who has been duly appointed to represent Mr. Lauferswiler's estate. Moreover, it does not appear that there is a duly appointed representative to ratify the petition and prosecute this case on behalf of Mr. Lauferswiler's estate. In the absence of such a duly appointed representative, the Court lacks jurisdiction to review this matter.
Upon due consideration and for cause, it is
ORDERED that, on or before June 30, 2023, the parties, each, shall show cause in writing why the Court should not dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the petition was not filed by Daniel Leon Lauferswiler, Deceased, or by someone lawfully authorized to act on his behalf, and there is no duly appointed representative to ratify the petition and prosecute this case on behalf of his estate.
The parties shall include in their response a copy of the death certificate for Daniel Leon Lauferswiler, Deceased. It is further
ORDERED that, if known, the Commissioner shall also include in his response, based on a diligent search conducted by him, the names, mailing addresses, and telephone numbers of Mr. Lauferswiler's living heirs-at-law.