Miville v. Commissioner

1970 T.C. Memo. 188, 29 T.C.M. 856, 1970 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 177
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJune 30, 1970
DocketDocket No. 5095-67.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1970 T.C. Memo. 188 (Miville v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Miville v. Commissioner, 1970 T.C. Memo. 188, 29 T.C.M. 856, 1970 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 177 (tax 1970).

Opinion

Alfred J. Miville and Marjorie C. Miville v. Commissioner.
Miville v. Commissioner
Docket No. 5095-67.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1970-188; 1970 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 177; 29 T.C.M. (CCH) 856; T.C.M. (RIA) 70188;
June 30, 1970, filed
*177

In 1961 T's father and mother because of marital difficulties entered into a marital settlement agreement which among other things provided that the mother was to receive $127,400 ($15,000 down and the balance over the years ending January 2, 1977. In the event of the mother's death the payments on any balance due were to be made to T and her sister. Held, the agreement was a property settlement agreement and the payments received thereunder byT after her mother's death were not taxable to her as "income in respect of a decedent" under sec. 691(a)(1) and (3), I.R.C. 1954.

Don B. Stahr, 713 First National Bank Bldg. of Wichita, Kan., for the petitioners. Larry K. Hercules, for the respondent. 857

TIETJENS

Memorandum Opinion

TIETJENS, Judge: For the taxable years 1964 and 1965, respectively, the Commissioner determined deficiencies of $1,309.76 and $1,021.12 in income taxes of petitioners.

We must decide whether certain payments which Marjorie C. Miville received during 1964 and 1965 are includable in her gross income under section 691, I.R.C. 1954, 1 as income in respect of a decedent.

All *178 of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.

Petitioners, Alfred J. Miville and Marjorie C. Miville, husband and wife, resided in Wichita, Kansas at the time they filed their petition herein. They filed joint income tax returns for the calendar years 1964 and 1965 with the district director of internal revenue for the district of Kansas.

Marjorie C. Miville (hereinafter referred to as petitioner) is the daughter of Thomas Mayo Crosby and Marjorie Rosen Crosby, deceased. Her parents executed a marital settlement agreement on August 3, 1961, which fully and completely settled their respective property rights and interests and all other claims either of them may have had by reason of the marital status. The terms of the agreement, so far as we have them, follow:

MARITAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 3rd day of August, 1961, by and between Thomas Mayo Crosby, of Topeka, Kansas, hereinafter designated as "Husband," and Marjorie Rosen Crosby, of Topeka, Kansas, hereinafter designated as "Wife."

WITNESSETH THAT:

WHEREAS, the parties hereto are Husband and Wife and are now and for some time past have been living separate and apart; and

WHEREAS, the *179 Husband has heretofore instituted in the District Court of Shawnee County, Kansas, First Division, an action for divorce against the Wife, which action is now pending in said District Court; and

WHEREAS, the Wife has heretofore, and subsequent to the bringing of said action by the Husband, instituted an action in the District Court of Shawnee County, Kansas, Second Division, for support and separate maintenance, which action is presently pending in said Court; and

WHEREAS, the parties have heretofore on the 30 day of June, 1961, entered into a written stipulation which outlines in general terms an agreement between the parties for property division or full settlement of property rights by reason of the marital status of the parties; and

WHEREAS, under said stipulation the parties agreed to enter into a more detailed Marital Settlement Contract to provide for the more exact or precise terms for carrying out the agreement made in said stipulation; and

WHEREAS, both of the parties have as issue of their marriage two children, namely:

Marianne Crosby Brinigar (married daughter), 421 Pine Rock Ave., Hamden, Connecticut;

Marjorie Crosby Miville, (married daughter), Wichita 12, Kansas, 7504 *180 Hale Ave. and

WHEREAS, it is the considered judgment of both Husband and Wife that the differences existing between them which caused the separation still exist and will continue to exist, with the result that said separation will be permanent; and

WHEREAS, in order to completely settle their property rights by reason of their marital status, Husband and Wife have been, for several weeks last past, negotiating for a full and complete settlement of their property rights and interests, during which negotiations Husband and Wife have made true, correct, and full disclosure to each other and to the respective counsel for said parties concerning their respective property and property rights; and

WHEREAS, Husband and Wife, after receiving full advice from their respective counsel, do hereby announce their desire and intention by this Agreement to make a full and complete settlement of their property rights and to fully and completely dispose of all their property interests as well as right of inheritance, and all other claims of whatsoever kind and nature by reason of the marital status, all to become effective as of the date of the execution of this Agreement, or August 3, 1961.

NOW, THEREFORE, *181 Husband and Wife agree to a full and complete settlement upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth: 858

1.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1970 T.C. Memo. 188, 29 T.C.M. 856, 1970 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miville-v-commissioner-tax-1970.