In Re the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of Dolbeer

New York Court of Appeals

In Re the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of Dolbeer

123 N.E. 881, 226 N.Y. 623, 1919 N.Y. LEXIS 985

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 22, 1919

StatusPublished

Cited by19 cases

This text of 123 N.E. 881 (In Re the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of Dolbeer) 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 the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of Dolbeer, 123 N.E. 881, 226 N.Y. 623, 1919 N.Y. LEXIS 985 (N.Y. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This appeal presents the question: Is the entire amount of a joint bank account in the name of husband and wife, payable to the survivor, created subsequent to the taking effect of chapter 664 of the Laws of 1915, taxable on the death of the husband? An appeal from a final order is not an appeal where questions should be certified as provided by the Code of Civil Procedure (§ 190, subd. 3), and it is unnecessary to answer the question certified.

In Matter of McKelway (221 N. Y. 15) it was held that even when the joint account was created prior to the adoption of the statute, the transfer by survivorship was taxable to the extent of one-half the joint property. When the joint account is created subsequent to the adoption of the statute, the privilege of acquiring the entire property by the right of succession may be subjected to the tax on the method of acquisition. (Matter of Vanderbilt, 172 N. Y. 69, 73; Matter of Keeney, 194 N. Y. 281; 222 U. S. 525.) The right to take property by survivor-ship is the creation of law upon which the state may impose conditions (Matter of Dows, 167 N. Y. 227; Matter of White, 208 N. Y. 64, 67), if no vested or contract rights are thereby violated.

*625 The record does not disclose who furnished the money which was deposited to the joint credit. Nothing indicates that the succession in this case Avas not donative in character (Matter of Orvis, 223 N. Y. 1, 7), and we may well reserve consideration of the application of the statute to a case where the survivor had previously acquired his interest for value.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, and the proceeding remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for the purpose of imposing a tax in accordance Avith this opinion.

His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

This appeal presents the question: Is the entire amount of a joint bank account in the name of husband and wife, payable to the survivor, created subsequent to the taking effect of chapter 664 of the Laws of 1915, taxable on the death of the husband? An appeal from a final order is not an appeal where questions should be certified as provided by the Code of Civil Procedure (§ 190, subd. 3), and it is unnecessary to answer the question certified.

In Matter of McKelway (221 N. Y. 15) it was held that even when the joint account was created prior to the adoption of the statute, the transfer by survivorship was taxable to the extent of one-half the joint property. When the joint account is created subsequent to the adoption of the statute, the privilege of acquiring the entire property by the right of succession may be subjected to the tax on the method of acquisition. (Matter of Vanderbilt, 172 N. Y. 69, 73; Matter of Keeney, 194 N. Y. 281; 222 U. S. 525.) The right to take property by survivor-ship is the creation of law upon which the state may impose conditions (Matter of Dows, 167 N. Y. 227; Matter of White, 208 N. Y. 64, 67), if no vested or contract rights are thereby violated.

*625 The record does not disclose who furnished the money which was deposited to the joint credit. Nothing indicates that the succession in this case Avas not donative in character (Matter of Orvis, 223 N. Y. 1, 7), and we may well reserve consideration of the application of the statute to a case where the survivor had previously acquired his interest for value.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, and the proceeding remitted to the Surrogate’s Court for the purpose of imposing a tax in accordance Avith this opinion.

His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 N.E. 881, 226 N.Y. 623, 1919 N.Y. LEXIS 985, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-transfer-tax-upon-the-estate-of-dolbeer-ny-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack