In re White's Estate
Decision Date | 19 March 1906 |
Citation | 84 P. 831,42 Wash. 360 |
Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Parties | In re WHITE'S ESTATE. |
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Arthur E. Griffin, Judge.
In the matter of the estate of William Wellington White, deceased. From an order of the probate court requiring executors to pay an inheritance tax, they appeal. Affirmed.
Chas F. Munday, for appellant.
State Board of Tax Commissioners, for respondents.
This is an appeal by the executors of the will of William Wellington White, deceased, from an order of the probate department of the superior court, directing the executors to pay the State Treasurer the sum of $166.13, pursuant to the act of March 6 1901, Laws of 1901, p. 67, c. 55, commonly known as the 'Inheritance Tax Law.' The validity of that act as applied to testamentary dispositions is the only question presented on this appeal. Section 1 of the act provides that all property within the jurisdiction of this state, and any interest therein, whether belonging to the inhabitants of this state or not, and whether tangible or intangible, which shall pass by will or by the statutes of inheritance of this or any other state, or by deed, grant, sale, or gift, made or intended to take effect in possession or enjoyment after the death of the grantor or donor, to any person in trust or otherwise, shall, for the use of the state, be subject to a tax as provided in section 2 of the act. It will thus be seen that the act imposes a tax on the right of succession whether the property passes by will, by operation of law, or by grant or gift to take effect in possession or enjoyment upon the death of the grantor or donor. The title of the act is as follows: 'An act relating to the taxation of inheritances and providing for disposition of same,' and the appellants contend that the title is not broad enough to sustain the provision imposing a tax upon property which passes by a will or otherwise than by operation of law.
The word 'inheritance' is no doubt properly confined to lands and tenements which pass by descent or by operation of law, but in popular use this distinction is often disregarded, and this is especially true in succession or inheritance tax laws. The terms 'inherit,' 'inheritance,' and 'inheritance tax law,' have thus been defined by lexicographers: Century Dictionary Webster's Unabridged Dictionary: Bouvier: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Moody v. Hagen
... ... OTTO A. HAGEN, Elina A. Skarderud, Emelia Mattison, and All Other Persons Interested in the Estate of Martin A. Hagen, Deceased, Respondents, and the Tax Commission of the State of North Dakota, Intervener No. 1915 Supreme Court of North Dakota ... ...
-
State ex rel. McClintock v. Guinotte
... ... v. Switzler, ... 143 Mo. 287; State ex rel. v. Henderson, 160 Mo ... 190; Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U.S. l. c. 70; ... Cope's Estate, 191 Pa. St. 24; State ex rel. v ... Ferris, 53 Ohio St. 314; Haggerty v. State, 55 ... Ohio St. 613; Ohio Laws 1894, p. 169; Allen v ... ...
-
Carlson's Estate, In re
...the property of the estate (State v. Clark, 30 Wash. 439, 71 Pac. 20; In re Clark's Estate, 37 Wash. 671, 80 Pac. 267; In re White's Estate, 42 Wash. 360, 84 Pac. 831; In re Stixrud's Estate, 58 Wash. 339, 109 Pac. 343, 33 L.R.A. (N.S.) 632, Ann.Cas.1912A, 850; In re Corbin's Estate, 107 Wa......
- In re Fotheringham's Estate