In Re Bank of New York

New York Court of Appeals

In Re Bank of New York

33 N.E.2d 691, 285 N.Y. 243, 1941 N.Y. LEXIS 1511

DecidedApril 17, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 33 N.E.2d 691 (In Re Bank of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Bank of New York, 33 N.E.2d 691, 285 N.Y. 243, 1941 N.Y. LEXIS 1511 (N.Y. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Section 230 of the Tax Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 60) as it stood at the date of death of the decedent and when the tax in question was paid, directed that where the transfer was to a person or corporation exempt from taxation or taxable at a rate less than the rate imposed and paid, the amount of any overpayment of such a tax with interest thereon should be returned to such person or corporation. This direction has not been abrogated by subsequently enacted provisions of the statute regulating the right to interest on deposits made thereunder. (L. 1911, ch. 800; L. 1925, ch. 144.) However unjust to the life tenant the result may be in this case, we are here bound to enforce section 230 as it stood when the tax in question was paid.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the decree of the Surrogate’s Court modified so as to direct that the interest on the transfer tax refund be paid to the appellant American Academy in Rome and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs in all courts to both parties payable out of the fund.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.

Ordered accordingly.

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

Per Curiam.

Section 230 of the Tax Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 60) as it stood at the date of death of the decedent and when the tax in question was paid, directed that where the transfer was to a person or corporation exempt from taxation or taxable at a rate less than the rate imposed and paid, the amount of any overpayment of such a tax with interest thereon should be returned to such person or corporation. This direction has not been abrogated by subsequently enacted provisions of the statute regulating the right to interest on deposits made thereunder. (L. 1911, ch. 800; L. 1925, ch. 144.) However unjust to the life tenant the result may be in this case, we are here bound to enforce section 230 as it stood when the tax in question was paid.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the decree of the Surrogate’s Court modified so as to direct that the interest on the transfer tax refund be paid to the appellant American Academy in Rome and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs in all courts to both parties payable out of the fund.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.

Ordered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 N.E.2d 691, 285 N.Y. 243, 1941 N.Y. LEXIS 1511, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-bank-of-new-york-ny-1941.