Dommerich v. Kelly State Tax Com'r.
| Decision Date | 14 September 1944 |
| Docket Number | No. 6.,6. |
| Citation | 39 A.2d 30,132 N.J.L. 141 |
| Parties | DOMMERICH et al. v. KELLY State Tax Com'r. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Supreme Court.
Proceeding in the matter of the transfer inheritance tax of the estate of Otto L. Dommerich, deceased, between Caroline C. Dommerich and others, executors of the last will and testament of Otto L. Dommerich, deceased, and William D. Kelly, State Tax Commissioner, involving the taxability of gratuitous inter vivos transfers of property in trust by deceased. From a judgment of the Supreme Court, 33 A.2d 893, 130 N.J.L. 542, affirming an advisory decree of the Prerogative Court, 27 A.2d 871, 132 N.J.Eq. 220, imposing a tax on such transfers, Caroline C. Dommerich and others appeal.
Judgment affirmed.
Milton, McNulty & Augelli, of Jersey City (John Milton, of Jersey City, of counsel), for prosecutors-appellants.
Walter D. Van Riper, Atty. Gen. (William A. Moore, of Trenton, of counsel), for defendant-respondent.
This is an appeal from a Supreme Court judgment on certiorari affirming a decree of the Prerogative Court imposing a transfer inheritance tax upon certain gifts inter vivos made by the decedent, Otto L. Dommerich. On certiorari, in matters of this character, it is the Supreme Court's prerogative and duty to find the facts. It is argued here that the Supreme Court did not find the facts independently of the Prerogative Court but merely approved the fact findings of that court. We cannot accept this view but think that the Supreme Court sufficiently found the facts and made its own conclusions thereon. That being so, the fact issue of whether the transfers were made in anticipation of death is res adjudicata and it is not open to us to arrive at a different fact conclusion (even on the assumption that we would be inclined so to do were we empowered to make an independent investigation and appraisal) so long as there was evidence to sustain the findings of fact of the Supreme Court.
The judgment under review is accordingly affirmed.
For affirmance: The CHIEF JUSTICE, Justices CASE, BODINE, DONGES, PORTER, COLIE, and Judges DEAR, WELLS, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, THOMPSON, and DILL-12.
For reversal: None.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Estate of Reddert v. US
...v. Kelly, 132 N.J.Eq. 220, 227, 27 A.2d 871 (N.J.Prerog.Ct.1942), aff'd, 130 N.J.L. 542, 33 A.2d 893 (N.J.Super.1943), aff'd, 132 N.J.L. 141, 39 A.2d 30 (N.J.1944); compare 26 U.S.C. § 2001 to N.J.S.A. § 54:34-1 (transfer occurs on the date of death and the value of the transferred property......
-
Montclair Trust Co. v. Zink
...131 N.J.Eq. 398, 25 A.2d 547; Dommerich v. Kelly, 132 N.J.Eq. 220, 27 A.2d 871, affirmed 130 N.J.L. 542, 33 A.2d 893, affirmed 132 N.J.L. 141, 39 A.2d 30. In Coffin v. Kelly, 133 N.J.Eq. 188, 31 A.2d 186, affirmed 131 N.J.L. 241, 36 A.2d 11, affirmed 133 N.J.L. 252, 44 A.2d 29, I ventured t......
-
Avery v. Walsh.
...131 N.J.Eq. 263, 24 A.2d 865; Dommerich v. Kelly, 132 N.J.Eq. 220, 27 A.2d 871, affirmed 130 N.J.L. 542, 33 A.2d 893, affirmed 132 N.J.L. 141, 39 A.2d 30; Voorhees v. Kelly, 132 N.J.Eq. 230, 28 A.2d 61, affirmed 130 N.J.L. 61, 31 A.2d 404, affirmed 131 N.J.L. 226, 35 A.2d 895. There is no s......
-
Johnson v. Zink, 7703.
...132 N.J.Eq. 1, 26 A.2d 529; Dommerich v. Kelly, 132 N.J.Eq. 220, 27 A.2d 871, affirmed 130 N.J.L. 542, 33 A.2d 893, affirmed 132 N.J.L. 141, 39 A.2d 30; Voorhees v. Kelly, 132 N.J.Eq. 230, 28 A.2d 61, affirmed 130 N.J.L. 61, 31 A.2d 404, affirmed 131 N.J.L. 226, 35 A.2d 895; Coffin v. Kelly......