Henshaw v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Ninth Circuit

Henshaw v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

31 F.2d 946, 7 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 8648, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3602, 7 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 8648

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 1, 1929

Docket5648

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 31 F.2d 946 (Henshaw v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Henshaw v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 31 F.2d 946, 7 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 8648, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3602, 7 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 8648 (9th Cir. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

DIETRICH, Circuit Judge.

This is a petition to review an order of the United States Board of Tax Appeals, affirming an assessment of $604,789.87 as an estate tax upon the estate of William G. Henshaw, deceased, of the net value of $5,334,898.46. During all his married life the decedent resided in California, and all of his property was acquired after his marriage to Hetty T. Henshaw, who, together with three children, survived him. In short, it is conceded his entire estate was community property as defined by the laws of California, and a one-half interest therein passed to his widow by operation of law. Both husband and wife had their domicile in California at the time of the former’s death. Upon these facts the only question presented to us is whether the half interest so passing to Mrs. Henshaw was subject to the tax. Consistently with the conclusion reached in Talcott v. United States (C. C. A.) 23 F.(2d) 897 (certiorari denied 277 U. S. 604, 48 S. Ct. 601, 72 L. Ed. 1011) onr answer must he in the affirmative. In neither material fact nor statutory provision is there any distinction, and we fail to find in the petitioners’ elaborate brief sufficient reason for now taldng a different view.

Affirmed.

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

DIETRICH, Circuit Judge.

This is a petition to review an order of the United States Board of Tax Appeals, affirming an assessment of $604,789.87 as an estate tax upon the estate of William G. Henshaw, deceased, of the net value of $5,334,898.46. During all his married life the decedent resided in California, and all of his property was acquired after his marriage to Hetty T. Henshaw, who, together with three children, survived him. In short, it is conceded his entire estate was community property as defined by the laws of California, and a one-half interest therein passed to his widow by operation of law. Both husband and wife had their domicile in California at the time of the former’s death. Upon these facts the only question presented to us is whether the half interest so passing to Mrs. Henshaw was subject to the tax. Consistently with the conclusion reached in Talcott v. United States (C. C. A.) 23 F.(2d) 897 (certiorari denied 277 U. S. 604, 48 S. Ct. 601, 72 L. Ed. 1011) onr answer must he in the affirmative. In neither material fact nor statutory provision is there any distinction, and we fail to find in the petitioners’ elaborate brief sufficient reason for now taldng a different view.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 F.2d 946, 7 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 8648, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3602, 7 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 8648, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henshaw-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-ca9-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack