Charles Kurz, Ruth C. Joseph, Thorkil Aschehoug, as Executors Under the Last Will and Testament of Theodore H. Joseph, Deceased v. United States

254 F.2d 811, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2158, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5667
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedApril 30, 1958
Docket24952
StatusPublished

This text of 254 F.2d 811 (Charles Kurz, Ruth C. Joseph, Thorkil Aschehoug, as Executors Under the Last Will and Testament of Theodore H. Joseph, Deceased v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Charles Kurz, Ruth C. Joseph, Thorkil Aschehoug, as Executors Under the Last Will and Testament of Theodore H. Joseph, Deceased v. United States, 254 F.2d 811, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2158, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5667 (2d Cir. 1958).

Opinion

254 F.2d 811

Charles KURZ, Ruth C. Joseph, Thorkil Aschehoug, as Executors under the Last Will and Testament of Theodore H. Joseph, deceased, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 332.

Docket 24952.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued April 17, 1958.

Decided April 30, 1958.

Eugene L. Bondy, of Bondy & Schloss, New York City (Bertram Braufman, of Bondy & Schloss, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiffs-appellants.

Gerard L. Goettel, Asst. U. S. Atty., S.D.N.Y., New York City (Paul W. Williams, U. S. Atty., and Benjamin T. Richards, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., New York City, on the brief), for defendant-appellee.

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and LUMBARD and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Here the executors under a will are claiming a refund of estate taxes paid by them on the value of a trust estate as to which their testator had retained a power of revocation. They argue that this trust for the benefit of children carried into effect only a provision of a separation agreement between him and his wife which, indeed, called for the trust, but without power of revocation. As District Judge Palmieri points out, however, in his well reasoned opinion, D.C.S. D.N.Y., 156 F.Supp. 99, it is both good sense and good law that these closely integrated and nearly contemporaneous documents be construed together, thus showing a retained power which makes the corpus taxable under I.R.C.1939, § 811(d)(2). We affirm on the opinion below.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kurz v. United States
156 F. Supp. 99 (S.D. New York, 1957)
Kurz v. United States
254 F.2d 811 (Second Circuit, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
254 F.2d 811, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2158, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-kurz-ruth-c-joseph-thorkil-aschehoug-as-executors-under-the-ca2-1958.