Rogers v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Rogers v. Commissioner

21 B.T.A. 1124, 1931 BTA LEXIS 2243

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedJanuary 13, 1931

DocketDocket No. 41239.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 21 B.T.A. 1124 (Rogers v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rogers v. Commissioner, 21 B.T.A. 1124, 1931 BTA LEXIS 2243 (bta 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

[1129]*1129OPINION.

Trammell :

The only issue in this proceeding is whether the transfers made by the decedent to his children on May 26,1924, were made in contemplation of death. The meaning of the phrase “ in contemplation of death,” as well as the effect of the statutory burden imposed on the petitioner by the presumption that such transfers were made in contemplation of death, has been discussed by us in various cases and no useful purpose would be served by repeating such discussions here. Bearing in mind throughout our consideration that the burden is upon the petitioner to establish facts sufficient to overcome the statutory presumption and the respondent’s! determination, we are of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence supports [1130]*1130the petitioner and affirmatively shows that the gifts were not made in contemplation of death. We have, therefore, found as a fact that the transfers were not made in contemplation of death. The value of 1,000 shares of the stock of the Eastman Kodak Co. should, therefore, be excluded from the gross estate.

Reviewed by the Board.

Judgment will be entered under Bule SO.

LaNSdoN, Smith, and Arundell dissent.

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

[1129]*1129OPINION.

Trammell :

The only issue in this proceeding is whether the transfers made by the decedent to his children on May 26,1924, were made in contemplation of death. The meaning of the phrase “ in contemplation of death,” as well as the effect of the statutory burden imposed on the petitioner by the presumption that such transfers were made in contemplation of death, has been discussed by us in various cases and no useful purpose would be served by repeating such discussions here. Bearing in mind throughout our consideration that the burden is upon the petitioner to establish facts sufficient to overcome the statutory presumption and the respondent’s! determination, we are of the opinion that the preponderance of the evidence supports [1130]*1130the petitioner and affirmatively shows that the gifts were not made in contemplation of death. We have, therefore, found as a fact that the transfers were not made in contemplation of death. The value of 1,000 shares of the stock of the Eastman Kodak Co. should, therefore, be excluded from the gross estate.

Reviewed by the Board.

Judgment will be entered under Bule SO.

LaNSdoN, Smith, and Arundell dissent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 B.T.A. 1124, 1931 BTA LEXIS 2243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-commissioner-bta-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack