Russell v. Commissioner

1962 T.C. Memo. 223, 21 T.C.M. 1178, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 87
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedSeptember 19, 1962
DocketDocket Nos. 90331, 92556.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1962 T.C. Memo. 223 (Russell 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
Russell v. Commissioner, 1962 T.C. Memo. 223, 21 T.C.M. 1178, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 87 (tax 1962).

Opinion

Stella Porter Russell v. Commissioner.
Russell v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 90331, 92556.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1962-223; 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 87; 21 T.C.M. (CCH) 1178; T.C.M. (RIA) 62223;
September 19, 1962

*87 Where petitioner was sole legatee and executrix of her husband's estate, the administration of that estate was not terminated for income tax purposes until December 31, 1959. The duties of the executrix were not completed until that date since it was reasonable for her to liquidate a close family corporation managed by her deceased husband before terminating his estate. The date of the death of petitioner's husband, Lester A. Russell, was May 29, 1955.

Carswell H. Cobb, Esq., 1100 Republic Bank Bldg., Dallas, Tex., for the petitioner. J. C. Linge, Esq., for the respondent.

BLACK

Memorandum Opinion

BLACK, Judge: The Commissioner determined deficiencies in income tax of petitioner for the years 1958 and 1959 in the amounts of $22,916.90 and $79,173.37, *88 respectively. In the notice of deficiency for 1958, the Commissioner made the following adjustments:

Taxable income shown on return$58,849.65
Additional income and unallowable
deduction:
(a) Income attributed to
Estate of Lester A.
Russell$30,551.67
(b) Medical expense111.38
Total additions30,663.05
Taxable income as adjusted$89,512.70
The Commissioner set forth the following as an explanation of the adjustments:

(a) It is determined that the amounts of income reported on the fiduciary income tax return filed for Estate of Lester A. Russell for the year 1958 are includible in your individual income tax return.

(b) It is determined that the cost of drugs in the amount of $111.38 is not deductible since it does not exceed 1 percent of adjusted gross income.

Similar adjustments were made in the notice of deficiency for 1959, differing only in amounts. The Commissioner explained the adjustment as to the additional income in part as follows:

(a) It is determined that administration of the Estate of Lester A. Russell has been terminated and that the income attributed to and reported by the Estate is reportable by Mrs. Stella Porter Russell.

*89 * * *

Petitioner agrees that the medical expense disallowances were proper and the only question in issue is whether or not the administration of the estate of Lester A. Russell should be considered terminated for income tax purposes prior to January 1, 1958, within the meaning of section 641 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

The income which the Commissioner has determined is reportable by petitioner in 1958 and 1959 was reported in income tax returns filed for the estate of Lester A. Russell for those years and taxes paid thereon. The estate has filed protective claims for refund in the amounts of $11,708.68 and $67,577.21, respectively.

A stipulation of facts, together with exhibits attached thereto, was filed by the parties and is incorporated herein by this reference.

Petitioner Stella Porter Russell is an individual residing in Dallas, Texas. She filed her income tax returns for the calendar years 1958 and 1959 on the cash basis with the district director of internal revenue at Dallas.

Petitioner's husband, Lester A. Russell, sometimes hereinafter called Lester, died testate on May 29, 1955, and petitioner was named independent executrix*90 of his estate shortly thereafter. His will was admitted to probate on June 20, 1955. Lester bequeathed and devised all of his property to his wife Stella, petitioner herein.

The estate of Lester consisted of varied interests in many tracts of real estate situated in Texas; mineral interests; corporate stocks; United States Treasury notes and bonds; bonds issued by various Texas cities and other municipal corporations; notes, mortgages, and accounts receivable on real estate sold by Lester; and miscellaneous personal property. The estate was valued at $1,225,111.01 for estate tax purposes.

A principal asset of the estate was approximately 50 percent of the stock of Russell Realty Company, Inc., a Texas corporation, sometimes hereinafter called the Realty Company. Prior to his death Lester had served as president and director and had managed the Realty Company. The Realty Company had 2,000 shares of outstanding stock; 999 shares of the stock were owned by Lester and one share was owned by the petitioner herein. Of the 999 shares owned by Lesser, 666 were his separate property and 333 shares were community property. Prior to his death in 1926, 999 shares were owned by Clinto, a brother*91 of Lester, and one share was registered in the name of Clinton P. Russell, Jr., sometimes hereinafter called Clinton, Jr., the son of Clinton.

The Realty Company had been chartered in 1904 for a 50-year term and its charter was extended in 1954 until June 2, 1959. At the time of Lester's death, the Realty Company had one employee and he was over 70 years of age.

Upon the death of Clinton, beneficial title to 333 of his shares of the capital stock of the Realty Company passed to his widow, Hattie W.

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

Related

Roebling v. Commissioner
18 T.C. 788 (U.S. Tax Court, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1962 T.C. Memo. 223, 21 T.C.M. 1178, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 87, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russell-v-commissioner-tax-1962.