Ruehlman v. Archiable

216 N.E.2d 918, 7 Ohio Misc. 189, 35 Ohio Op. 2d 207, 1965 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 266
CourtHamilton County Probate Court
DecidedMarch 24, 1965
DocketNo. 2541
StatusPublished

This text of 216 N.E.2d 918 (Ruehlman v. Archiable) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hamilton County Probate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ruehlman v. Archiable, 216 N.E.2d 918, 7 Ohio Misc. 189, 35 Ohio Op. 2d 207, 1965 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 266 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1965).

Opinion

Davies, J.

In their petition, Grayce A. Reuhlman and C. T. Romer, co-executors of the estate of George W. Archiable, deceased, have asked the court to construe Items 12 and 13 of said decedent’s will and Item 14 of a codicil thereto dated November 20, 1957.

The testator, George W. Archiable, died on March 23, 1964, survived by his second wife, May B. Archiable, his daughter, Grayce A. Ruehlman, and two minor grandchildren, George Wesley Archiable, Jr., and Joan Archiable, children of his deceased son, Wesley Archiable. Grayce A. Reuhlman and Wesley Archiable are children of the testator’s first marriage.

The inventory value of the decedent’s probate estate is $391,972.74, consisting of realty in the amount of $19,500, and personalty in the sum of $372,472.74. The decedent also owned Kentucky real estate valued at $15,000, making a total probate estate valued at $406,972.74. The decedent died possessed of non-probate assets valued at $359,894.05, consisting of assets in a revocable Archiable Trust created by the decedent for the [190]*190benefit of Grayce A. Ruehlman or her children valued at $308,-574; joint and survivorship accounts, the survivor being Grayce A. Ruehlman, valued at $25,574.11; and life insurance proceeds, payable to Grayce A. Ruehlman, valued at $25,565.94. The combined probate and non-probate assets of the decedent’s estate at the time of his death were valued at $766,866.79. The debts and costs of administration of the decedent’s estate are estimated to total $36,461.93.

The widow, May B. Archiable, made an antenuptial agreement with the decedent by the terms of which she took only the decedent’s one-half interest in certain real estate valued at $17,-500. She also received a cash bequest of $100'.

Since the Ohio inheritance and the federal estate taxes will be levied upon successions to probate and non-probate properties passing to or for the use of the persons designated in the testator’s will or in instruments created for their benefits, the court is first asked to decide whether or not the language contained in George W. Archiable’s will and the codicil thereto dated November 20,1957, is sufficient to authorize the payment out of the property of said estate the total Ohio inheritance taxes and the federal estate taxes, including such amounts as may be attributable to the property which is not a part of the probate estate. If there were no non-probate assets and only probate assets in the decedent’s estate, it is estimated that the federal estate tax would amount to $74,138.31. By including the non-probate assets, it is estimated that the total federal estate tax on probate and non-probate assets would total $180,567.07. An apportionment of this tax between the probate and non-probate assets would result in a tax of $91,168.02 levied against the non-probate assets and a tax of $89,399.95 levied against the probate assets. If, of course, there is no apportionment of the tax, the whole $180,567.07 would be levied against the probate assets.

Item 13 of the testator’s will provides that after the payment of all debts, the cost of administering said estate, the Ohio inheritance taxes and the federal estate taxes, the residue of the estate is devised: one-half to Grayce A. Ruehlman individually and one-half to the First National Bank of Cincinnati, in trust, to become a part of an irrevocable living trust created on December 8,1935, by the testator by the terms of which one-half of the trust was to be distributed to Grayce A. Ruehlman upon [191]*191the trustor’s death and the other half being distributable to the children of the deceased son, Wesley Archiable. This irrevocable trust is not subject to the payment of Ohio inheritance tax or federal estate tax.

In Item 14, the testator nominated his daughter, G-rayce, to be executrix under his will, authorizing and empowering her to sell at public or private sale, on the best terms obtainable, any of his property, real, personal and mixed for the purpose of paying any debts and funeral expenses and the cost of administration, including the payment of all taxes.

The codicil, dated November 20,1957, nominated the daughter, Grayee A. Ruehlman and Clem T. Romer to be co-executors of the will, and empowered the executors to sell at public or private sale any of the testator’s property, real, personal, or mixed for the purpose of paying debts and funeral expenses and administration of the estate, including the payment of all taxes.

Both in Ohio and in other jurisdictions courts have dealt with many cases which have involved problems of fixing state and federal inheritance and estate taxes and in determining upon whom the burden of paying such taxes shall be placed.

In the construction of George W. Archiable’s will and codicil, as is true in the construction of all wills, the court must remember that the cardinal rule of interpretation of a will is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the testator. 56 Ohio Jurisprudence 2d Wills, Section 519, page 46.

What, then, was the intention of this testator in regard to the payment of the federal estate and Ohio inheritance taxes which would be fixed in the administration of his estate because of his death? Did he intend that all of such taxes should be paid out of his probate assets, or did he intend that there should be an apportionment in the payment of such taxes between the beneficiaries of his non-probate assets and the beneficiaries of his probate property, and, in either event, did he intend that the payment of the taxes assessed against the probate assets should be paid only by his residuary, beneficiaries? His will (Item 13) provides that “after the payment of all my debts, the cost of administering said estate, the Ohio inheritance taxes and the federal estate taxes, I give, devise and bequeath all of the rest, residue and remainder of all of my property, real, personal and mixed, of whatsoever nature [192]*192and kind, and wheresoever situate and wheresoever found to my executrix, hereinafter named, and I hereby direct that the residue remaining in the hands of my executrix be divided in two equal parts; one-half of the remainder of said residue to be paid to my daughter, G-rayce A. Ruehlman, individually, and the remaining half of said resdue to the First National Bank of Cincinnati, in trust, to become a part of the trust created in my lifetime for the benefit of my son and daughter and their children as hereinabove set forth.”

In the codicil to his will, after nominating fiduciaries, he authorizes and empowers them to sell at public or private sale on the best terms obtainable, any of his property, real, personal, or mixed, for the purpose of paying his debts and funeral expenses and administration of his estate, including the payment of all taxes. There is also a reference to the payment of taxes in Item 12 of his will, which will hereinafter be discussed.

In the case of In re Estate of Gatch, 153 Ohio St. 401, the court was called upon to interpret an item of the decedent’s will, very similar to the language in the Archiable will and codicil, which provided that “I direct that all my just debts and funeral expenses be first paid out of my estate, and I further direct that all taxes, both state and federal shall be a charge against the principal of my estate and shall be paid therefrom and shall not be charged against the interest of any distributee.

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

Related

In Re Estate of Gatch
92 N.E.2d 404 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1950)
In re Estate of McKitrick
172 N.E.2d 197 (Ohio Probate Court of Franklin County, 1960)
In re Estate of Kilroy
86 Ohio Law. Abs. 366 (Cuyahoga County Probate Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
216 N.E.2d 918, 7 Ohio Misc. 189, 35 Ohio Op. 2d 207, 1965 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruehlman-v-archiable-ohprobcthamilto-1965.