Estate of Iacino, In re, C--601

• Decision Date: 24 November 1975
• Docket Number: No. C--601,C--601
• Citation: 542 P.2d 840
• Parties: In re the ESTATE of Jeanne A. IACINO, a/k/a Jeanne Iacino. Nicholas TRUGLIO, Individually, and as executor of the Estate of Jeanne A.IACINO, a/k/a Jeanne Iacino, and the Colorado National Bank, individually andas Administrator C.T.A. for the Estate of Jeanne A. Iacino, a/k/a JeanneIacino,Petitioners, v. PEOPLE of the State of Colorado ex rel. Joseph F. DOLAN, Executive Director, Department of Revenue, State of Colorado, Respondent.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

Page 840

542 P.2d 840

189 Colo. 513

In re the ESTATE of Jeanne A. IACINO, a/k/a Jeanne Iacino.

Nicholas TRUGLIO, Individually, and as executor of the

Estate of Jeanne A.IACINO, a/k/a Jeanne Iacino, and the

Colorado National Bank, individually andas Administrator

C.T.A. for the Estate of Jeanne A. Iacino, a/k/a

JeanneIacino,Petitioners, v. PEOPLE of the State of Colorado ex rel. Joseph F. DOLAN,

Executive Director, Department of Revenue, State

of Colorado, Respondent.

No. C--601.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

Nov. 24, 1975.

Belmore T. Martin, Denver, for petitioners.

J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Jean E. Dubofsky, Deputy Atty. Gen., Edward G. Donovan, Sol. Gen., Morton H. Letofsky, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Mary J. Mullarkey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PRINGLE, Chief Justice.

This case presents the issue of whether, for inheritance tax purposes, a child remains a 'stepchild' after the dissolution of the marriage between the child's natural parent and his 'stepparent.'

The decedent, Jeanne A. Iacino, and Mose Iacino were married in 1937. Mose Iacino had two children by a previous marriage. These children were not adopted by the decedent. After thirty years of marriage, the decedent died leaving bequests to both of her 'stepchildren.'

The Department of Revenue classified the 'children' as 'Class D' beneficiaries pursuant to C.R.S.1963, 138--3--14. ¹ Class D beneficiaries are defined by the statute as those persons having no relationship to the testator. The estate and children objected, claiming that the children should be classified as 'Class A' beneficiaries and thus be taxed at a lower rate. The Probate Court of the City and County of Denver sustained these objections. The Court of Appeals reversed, In re the Estate of Jeanne A. Iacino, Colo.App., 529 P.2d 346. We granted certiorari and now reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

I

C.R.S.1963, 138--3--14(2), in pertinent part, defines Class A beneficiaries as: 'Father, mother, husband, wife, child, Stepchild, or any child or children legally adopted as such, or to any lineal descendant of such decedent; . . .' (Emphasis added)

The estate and the children of Mose Iacino claim that they are the stepchildren of Jeanne Iacino within the meaning of the statute. The only issue therefore, is whether, for the purpose of this statute, the children of Mose Iacino remained the 'stepchildren' of Jeanne Iacino after the divorce from Mose Iacino.

The stepparent-stepchild relation is one of affinity, rather than consanguinity. The Court of Appeals held and the Department of Revenue contends that since a divorce terminates all incidents of a marriage, the affinal stepchild relationship cannot survive the marriage.

To determine the meaning of the word 'stepchild' in the statute, we must look to the intent of the legislature in creating the statute. The structure of the inheritance tax program indicates that the legislature wished to tax those persons who may be loosely classified as 'family relations' at a lower rate than persons not related to the decedent. In terms of family relations, it is not at all apparent that the ties that often bind a stepparent to his stepchild will automatically terminate upon a divorce from the child's natural parent. The very fact that the testatrix in this case chose to make the bequest indicates that the relationship engendered by the marriage continued between the testatrix and these children.

The precise issue now before the Court was decided by the Washington Supreme Court in In re Ehler's Estate, 53 Wash.2d 679, 335 P.2d 823. The court in Ehler held that, for inheritance tax purposes, the stepchild-stepparent relationship continues, regardless of the dissolution of the marriage between the natural parent and the stepparent. The court relied upon an earlier case, In re Bordeaux' Estate, 37 Wash.2d 561, 225 P.2d 433, which discussed in detail the question of termination of the stepchild relationship. The court in Bordeaux held that the death of the natural parent did not terminate the stepchild relationship with the stepparent.

The court in Ehler stated that the distinction between death and divorce in terms of inheritance tax classifications was a distinction 'without any compelling legal significance,' 53 Wash.2d at 681, 335 P.2d at 825. We agree.

The ...