Opinion
1702-22S
02-06-2023
ARTHUR C. NUTTALL, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge.
Petitioner Arthur C. Nuttall died prior to the filing of the petition commencing this case. It is well settled that unless the petition is filed by the taxpayer, 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); Rule 60(a), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. In pertinent part, Rule 60(c) provides that "The 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."
On September 30, 2022, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause directing the parties to show cause, on or before October 24, 2022, why this case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the petition was not filed by petitioner or by someone lawfully authorized to act on behalf of decedent's estate.
On October 21, 2022, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Respondent states in the motion that (1) a notice of deficiency dated October 12, 2021, was issued to petitioner; (2) the petition was filed and signed on behalf of petitioner by Anne M. Nuttal, who is not a fiduciary or personal representative of the Estate of Arthur C. Nuttall; and (3) the petition was not executed by or on behalf of a fiduciary or personal representative duly appointed by a Court of competent jurisdiction and legally entitled to institute a case on behalf of Arthur C. Nuttall, Deceased. Respondent states in the motion to dismiss that counsel for petitioner does not object to the granting of the motion.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that the Court's Order to Show Cause, dated September 30, 2022, is hereby made absolute. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.