In re Ramsdill's Estate

• Decision Date: 21 January 1908
• Citation: 190 N.Y. 492,83 N.E. 584
• Parties: In re RAMSDILL'S ESTATE.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

190 N.Y. 492

83 N.E. 584

In re RAMSDILL'S ESTATE.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Jan. 21, 1908.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

In the matter of the appraisal under the transfer tax law (Laws 1896, p. 868, c. 908, § 220) upon the estate of Charles Ramsdill, deceased. From an order of the Appellate Division, First Department (119 App. Div. 890,105 N. Y. Supp. 1139), affirming an order of the surrogate exempting the decedent's estate from a transfer tax, and vacating a pro forma order previously made fixing a tax on the estate, the state comptroller appeals. Order of the Appellate Division and final order of the surrogate reversed, and the surrogate's pro forma order affirmed.William J. Roche, for appellant.

Edgar N. Dollin, for respondent.

WERNER, J.

On the 19th day of December, 1903, Charles Ramsdill died intestate, a resident of Malden, Mass., and leaving him surviving a brother and certain nieces and nephews. His personal estate, amounting to about $72,000, was all outside of this state, except some shares of stock in two corporations. In the course of administration in this state application was made to the surrogate of New York county for the usual appraisal under the transfer tax act. That proceeding resulted in a report to the surrogate showing that the decedent's total personal estate amounted to $72,642, of which only $6,460 was within this state, and that the total charges against the estate for funeral expenses, debts, and cost of administration were $12,041.66. According to this appraisal the assets within this state amounted to 9 per cent. of the decedent's total personal estate, and the appraiser, therefore, deducted therefrom 9 per cent. of the debts and expenses referred to, which amounted to $1,084. Computed upon this basis the decedent's net assets within this state were valued at $5,376, upon which the share of the intestate's brother was reported as exempt from tax, and the shares of the nephews and nieces were reported as taxable at the rate of 5 per cent. The report of the appraiser was confirmed by the surrogate, and an order made fixing the tax. Subsequently the administrator applied to the surrogate to vacate his former order fixing the tax. In support of that application the administrator averred that he had elected to appropriate all the assets situate within this state, and the proceeds thereof, in payment of the distributive share of the intestate's brother. The application was granted by the surrogate, and from his order thus made an appeal was taken to the Appellate Division, which resulted in an unanimous affirmance of the surrogate's decision.

Upon this brief statement of the facts it is at once apparent that the only question at issue is whether the administrator of a foreign intestate can so apply that portion of the estate which is found within our jurisdiction as to avoid the payment of a tax upon a transfer that is taxable under the statute. The administrator in the case at bar claims the right to do so under the authority of Matter of James, 144 N. Y. 6, 38 N. E. 961, and this claim is challenged by the state comptroller.

In Matter of James, supra, the decedent was a resident of England, although he died in Africa. He left a will in which he disposed of a large estate, the greater portion of which was within this state. The will provided for specific legacies to various collateral relatives and foreign charitable institutions, subject to the payment of which the residue of the estate was given to executors in trust for the decedent's two brothers. The legatees, with the exception of the two brothers who lived in this country, were residents of England. The portion of the estate located in Great Britain was more than sufficient to pay the specific legacies, and the executors appropriated that portion of the estate to the payment of the legacies, and decided to place in the residuary fund that portion of the estate which was within our jurisdiction. Under the statute as it then stood legacies to brothers were exempt from taxation. Laws 1887, p. 921, c. 713. It may be suggested in passing that the...