In re Estate of Astor

20 Abb. N. Cas. 405, 14 N.Y. St. Rep. 478
CourtNew York Surrogate's Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1888
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 20 Abb. N. Cas. 405 (In re Estate of Astor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Estate of Astor, 20 Abb. N. Cas. 405, 14 N.Y. St. Rep. 478 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).

Opinion

Ransom, Surrogate.

The substance of this application is for the appointment of an appraiser, provided to be appointed upon the application of an interested party, according to the provisions of chapter 713 Laws of 1887. The petitioner has made all the legatees named in the will of the decedent, and [411]*411the comptroller, parties to this proceeding, and-served them with citation to show cause why the collateral inheritance tax should not be paid. Upon the return day of the citation all the parties appeared before the court, and the respondents liandcd up briefs upon the proposition t-liat they are not liable to the tax, being corporations or societies exempt by law from taxation, and therefore relieved from the payment of the tax on collateral inheritances.

I have examined the statute under which this tax may be assessed, and I am of opinion that the legatees under a will and the respondents in this proceedings are not proper parties and have presently no standing in court. I am preparing my views with some care for the purpose of indicating what I deem to be the proper practice in cases of this sort. As it is probably important that-petitioner be afforded the relief to which hp is entitled, speedily, I will decide the questions presented on this application some little time before I shall be able to file my opinion now in course of preparation. An order for the appointment of an appraiser in this proceeding may be submitted.

II. March 19,1888.

Ransom, Surrogate

I have already written a memorandum in this proceeding, announcing my decision granting the application of the executors for the appointment of an appraiser. I have deemed it proper to supplement that memorandum by some observations upon the construction to be given the act (chap. 713, Laws of 1887), which I believe will be useful to parties interested in estates subject to tax under the provisions of that act; and also the act (chap. 483, Laws of 1885), which in all the respects now under consideration, is substantially, if not precisely, similar.

This legislation in form and substance is justly entitled to severe condemnation for great looseness and incoherence of expression. There is no symmetry in its provisions, and it is impossible to be certain of the intention of the law[412]*412makers in respect of the various steps which it may be necessary to take to effectuate its purpose. And if much is required by me to be done to put in motion the cumbersome and awkward machinery set up for the collection of taxes upon.collateral inheritances, etc., which may seem to be unnecessary, the cause therefor must be looked for within v the halls of legislation, where this anomolous statute was invented and sent forth to confuse, and therefore exasperate the personal representatives of deceased persons and the courts, by its glaring inconsistencies and absurdities. After much patient reading and re-reading of this act, I have concluded upon a course of procedure which I hope and believe will bear the test of superior judicial investigation.

Fortunately, the constitutionality of the law cannot now be mooted. The court of appeals has settled that (Re McPherson, 104 N. Y. 306).

The object of the act, as disclosed by its title, is to tax gifts, legacies and collateral inheritances in certain cases.”

Section 1 provides that all property which shall pass by will, or by the intestate laws of this State, from any person who may die seized or possessed of the same . . . other than to or for the use of his or her father, mother, husband, wife, child, brother, sister, the wife or widow of a son, or the husband of a daughter, or any child or children adopted, as such in conformity with the laws of the State of New York . . . shall be and is subject to a tax of five dollars on every hundred dollars of the clear market value of such property . . . to be paid to the comptroller of New York for the use of the State ; and all administrators, executors and trustees shall be liable for any and all such taxes until the same shall have been paid . . . provided that an estate which may be valued at a less sum than five hundred dollars shall not be subject to such duty or tax.”

It is not my purpose now to attempt to answer whether the expression “an estate,” in the last sentence of this section, means the whole estate of the deceased person, or only bo much thereof as passes to a person other than one of [413]*413those exempted from the tax. This question may be presented some time, as for instance in case of a will bequeathing an entire estate worth over five hundred dollars to two or more persons in amounts of less than that sum each. Nor shall I speculate upon the office and purpose of the word “-duty,” the last word but two in this section. It seems to be synonymous with the last word, “tax,” but it may be that it was interpolated for the purpose of embellishment.

To my best understanding section 2 provides that, when any “grant, gift, legacy or succession, upon which a tax is imposed by section 1, shall be an estate, income or interest for a term of years or for life . .'. the .entire property or fund by which such estate, income or interest is supported, or of which it is a part, shall be appraised immediately after the death of the decedent at what was the fair market value thereof at the time of the death of the decedent, in the manner hereinafter provided (see § 13), and the surrogate shall thereupon assess and.determine the value of the estate, income or interest subject to said tax, in the manner recorded in section 13 of this act.”

By reference to section 13 for “ recorded ” provisions, we find that the value of the estate is to be ascertained by an appraiser, who shall be some “ competent person appointed for that purpose, who shall appraise the same at its fair market value,” and upon his report the surrogate shall fix the then cash value of estates, annuities, life estates, etc.

Thus it seems by section 2, the surrogate is to appraise in person, otherwise how can he “determine” the value of the estate ? And by section 13, the appraisement is to be made by another officer, whose appraisement ought to be final, if made in good faith. Beading these two sections of the act together, I believe the value of all estates subject to the tax must be ascertained by an appraiser, before whom all parties interested have the right to appear. This "must be so, else why the provisions “ recorded ” in section 13, requiring the appraiser to forthwith give notice to “ all persons known to [414]*414have or claim an interest in such property of the time and place he will appraise such property.” And the appraiser must also give such notice to such persons as the surrogate may by order direct. Thus it may seem that the appraiser has another duty separate and apart from.the surrogate, viz.: to exercise his own judgment as to what persons shall have notice, and then look to the surrogate’s order for the names of any other persons discovered and designated by him.

I shall not commit myself to such a construction.

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

Related

In re Estate of Prout
3 Silv. Sup. 170 (New York Supreme Court, 1889)
Frazer v. People
6 Dem. Sur. 174 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1888)
In re the Estate of Frowe
20 N.Y. St. Rep. 355 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1888)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 Abb. N. Cas. 405, 14 N.Y. St. Rep. 478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-astor-nysurct-1888.