Bradford v. Storey
| Decision Date | 11 September 1905 |
| Citation | 75 N.E. 256,189 Mass. 104 |
| Parties | BRADFORD, Treasurer v. STOREY. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Roger F. Sturgis, for appellant.
Frederic B. Greenhalge, for appellee.
These are two appeals relating to the same estate, and at the request of the parties were consolidated and heard together. They were reserved for the full court, and such disposition is to be made of them as shall seem meet. The question at issue relates to the collection of a collateral inheritance tax from the estate of one Sarah Ann Tileston, who died testate in March, 1894, leaving an estate appraised at upwards of $49,000. By her will the testatrix gave her property to nephews and nieces. The estate was, therefore subject to a collateral inheritance tax, under St. 1891, p 1028, c. 425, § 1, now Rev. Laws, c. 15, § 1. It is not contended that it was not, or that the tax has ever been paid. The administrator, seeks to avoid the payment on the ground that the probate court had no jurisdiction of the petition by the Treasurer and Receiver General to have the amount of the tax determined and its payment ordered by the administrator, or if it had, that the tax is barred by the general statute of limitations or by the special statute affecting actions against executors or administrators. There is also a further question relating to interest.
Two executors were named in the will, but only one survived the testatrix. He was duly appointed April 24, 1894, and subsequently filed an inventory and paid certain legacies and annuities. In December, 1896, he resigned without having filed any account. In January, 1897, the respondent was appointed, and subsequently filed an inventory and two accounts, one of which was a final account. Neither of the accounts has been allowed. In November, 1902, the judge of the probate court, acting under Rev. Laws, c. 15, § 20, and upon the application of trustees who had been appointed under the will, certified to the petitioner that the final account of the respondent had been filed and that the settlement of the estate was delayed by reason of the nonpayment of the collateral inheritance taxes. Thereupon the petition in this case was filed. The respondent made a motion to dismiss on the ground that the petition was in effect an action at law to collect the tax and the probate court had not jurisdiction. The motion was denied, and the respondent appealed. Subsequently he filed an answer, not waiving this appeal, and setting up in bar the general statute of limitations and the special statute applicable to executors and administrators. A hearing was had, and a decree was entered that the respondent was liable for a tax upon the net value of the estate, with interest from April 24, 1896, being two years after the date of the appointment of the executor, and the amount of the tax was determined, but no order was made for its payment. From this decree, also, the respondent appealed. This appeal and the appeal from the order overruling the motion to dismiss constitute the two appeals referred to earlier in this opinion.
The question whether the general statute of limitations applied was left open in Howe v. Howe, 179 Mass. 546, 61 N.E. 225, 55 L. R. A. 626, and the question whether the special statute applied was not raised. Rev. Laws, C. 202,§ 2, provides that 'the following actions shall, except as otherwise provided be commenced only within six years next after the cause of action accrues: First, action of contract founded upon contracts or liabilities express or implied, except actions limited by the provisions of the preceding section or actions upon judgments or decrees of courts of record of the United States, or of this or of any other state of the United States.' The 'actions limited by the provisions of the preceding section' have nothing to do with the question now before us. Section 17 of the same chapter provides that 'the limitations of the preceding sections of this chapter shall apply to actions brought by the commonwealth or for...
To continue reading
Request your trial