Soars v. Graham

Third Circuit

Soars v. Graham

256 F.2d 762, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2173

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMay 21, 1958

DocketNo. 12506

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 256 F.2d 762 (Soars v. Graham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Soars v. Graham, 256 F.2d 762, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2173 (3d Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case the executor of the estate of Lucilla M. Soars, deceased, has appealed from the judgment of the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in favor of the district director of internal revenue denying recovery of federal estate tax alleged to have been erroneously exacted. The decedent was the life beneficiary, with power to consume principal, under the will of her husband Stephen Soars, late of Muncy, Pennsyl[763]*763vania, and the tax was assessed upon the appreciated value at her death of certain shares of stock belonging to her husband’s estate which she had not consumed. The theory of the government was that under the law of Pennsylvania the decedent was a debtor to the remain-dermen under her husband’s will for the value of the estate at his death and that any appreciation in its value at her death belonged to her. The plaintiff, conceding that under In re Powell’s Estate, 1941, 340 Pa. 404, 17 A.2d 391, this would be so, asserts that this rule has been changed by In re Lyman’s Estate, 1950, 366 Pa. 164, 76 A.2d 633. For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the District Court filed by Judge Follmer, 163 F.Supp. 239, to which we need add nothing, we are satisfied that the government’s contention in this regard is right.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this case the executor of the estate of Lucilla M. Soars, deceased, has appealed from the judgment of the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in favor of the district director of internal revenue denying recovery of federal estate tax alleged to have been erroneously exacted. The decedent was the life beneficiary, with power to consume principal, under the will of her husband Stephen Soars, late of Muncy, Pennsyl[763]*763vania, and the tax was assessed upon the appreciated value at her death of certain shares of stock belonging to her husband’s estate which she had not consumed. The theory of the government was that under the law of Pennsylvania the decedent was a debtor to the remain-dermen under her husband’s will for the value of the estate at his death and that any appreciation in its value at her death belonged to her. The plaintiff, conceding that under In re Powell’s Estate, 1941, 340 Pa. 404, 17 A.2d 391, this would be so, asserts that this rule has been changed by In re Lyman’s Estate, 1950, 366 Pa. 164, 76 A.2d 633. For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the District Court filed by Judge Follmer, 163 F.Supp. 239, to which we need add nothing, we are satisfied that the government’s contention in this regard is right.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 F.2d 762, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/soars-v-graham-ca3-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack