Mahoney v. Wis. Tax Comm'n (In re Mahoney's Estate)
| Decision Date | 05 December 1939 |
| Citation | 233 Wis. 138,288 N.W. 763 |
| Parties | In re MAHONEY'S ESTATE. MAHONEY v. WISCONSIN TAX COMMISSION et al. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from an order of the County Court of Dane County; George C. Kroncke, Judge.
Proceeding in the matter of the estate of Josephine S. Mahoney, deceased, wherein a controversy arose between Margaret E. Mahoney, administratrix of the estate of the deceased, and the Wisconsin Tax Commission and others. From an order determining an inheritance tax, due under St.1937, § 72.01 et seq., and directing administratrix to forthwith pay the tax to the county treasurer, the administratrix appeals.-[By Editorial Staff.]
Affirmed in part, and reversed in part, and record remanded for further proceedings in accordance with opinion.
Margaret E. Mahoney as administratrix of the estate of her sister Josephine S. Mahoney appeals from an order of the county court of Dane County entered January 30, 1939, determining an inheritance tax in the sum of $2,950.28 for the payment of which the heirs of said Josephine S. Mahoney were liable and directing the administratrix to forthwith pay said sum to the county treasurer. Josephine S. Mahoney, a resident of Dane County, died intestate July 20, 1934. She left surviving her a sister Margaret E. Mahoney and Daniel C. Mahoney, a brother. The county court found that at the time of her death said Josephine S. Mahoney was sole owner of the following personal property, to-wit:
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦“180 4/5 shares of Wisconsin Bankshares Corporation ¦$ 452.00 ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦Certain oil leases more specifically described in the inventory ¦100.00 ¦
¦filed herein ¦ ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦Cash ¦918.68 ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦Total ¦$1,470.68”¦
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The court further found that at the time of her death said decedent and her sister Margaret were seized of the following personal property as joint tenants, to-wit:
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦“55 shares of the 7% preferred stock of Harry S. Manchester, Inc.,¦ ¦
¦registered and issued in the names of Josephine S. Mahoney or ¦$3,850.00 ¦
¦Margaret E. Mahoney ¦ ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦25 shares of the 7% preferred stock of Harry S. Manchester, Inc., ¦ ¦
¦registered and issued in the names of Josephine S. Mahoney and ¦1,750.00 ¦
¦Margaret E. Mahoney ¦ ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦10 shares of the common stock of the Wisconsin Bankshares ¦ ¦
¦Corporation, registered and issued in the names of Josephine S. ¦25.00 ¦
¦Mahoney and Margaret E. Mahoney ¦ ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦An unregistered $1,000 first mortgage 6% Bond issued by the ¦650.00 ¦
¦Langlade Telephone Company ¦ ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦Total ¦$6,275.00 ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦One-half interest ¦$3,137.50”¦
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The court made the following finding with reference to certain real estate as to which the respondent claims Josephine was a joint tenant with her sister Margaret and as to which the appellant claims that Margaret was the sole owner:
“(4) That the real estate of which the decedent was seized as a joint tenant with her sister, Margaret E. Mahoney, but of which the record title at the time of said decedent's death was in the sole name of her said sister, and the value thereof is as follows:
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦Lot Fourteen (14), Block Seven (7), original plat, City¦$76,764.00¦ ¦
¦of Madison ¦ ¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦South Forty-four (44) feet of Lot (1) and South ¦ ¦ ¦
¦Forty-four (44) feet of West one-half of Lot two (2), ¦$17,355.00¦ ¦
¦Block Seven (7) City of Madison, known as 515 North ¦ ¦ ¦
¦Lake Street ¦ ¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Total ¦$94,119.00¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Less mortgage of ¦25,062.50 ¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Balance ¦$69,056.50¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Decedent's one-half interest ¦ ¦$34,528.25¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Gross value of estate ¦ ¦$39,136.43¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦That the following deductions are allowed: ¦ ¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Funeral expenses ¦$ 379.00 ¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Expenses of administration ¦105.05 ¦ ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------+----------+----------¦
¦Total deductions ¦ ¦$ 484.05 ¦
+------------------------------------------------------------------+----------¦
¦Clear market value of estate after deductions ¦ ¦
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Further material facts are stated in the opinion.
John S. Cavanaugh and William A. McNamara, both of Madison, for appellant.
John E. Martin, Atty. Gen., Harold H. Persons, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Neil Conway, Inh. Tax Counsel, of Madison, for respondent.
Margaret and Josephine were unmarried and Josephine, for many years prior to her death, lived with her sister Margaret. At the time of the hearing in the county court, Margaret was eighty years of age.
All of the real estate described in finding number four set out in the foregoing statement of facts was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nelson v. Mattson
... ... Corp.; and all other persons unknown claiming any estate or interest in, or lien or encumbrance upon, the property ... contribute it to the partnership assets."); In re Mahoney's Estate , 233 Wis. 138, 288 N.W. 763, 765 (1939) ... ...
-
Nelson v. Mattson
... ... Corp.;and all other persons unknown claimingany estate or interest in, or lien or encumbrance upon,the property ... contribute it to the partnership assets."); In re Mahoney's Estate, 288 N.W. 763, 765 (Wis. 1939) (concluding that ... ...
-
Schreiber's Estate, In re
...purposes is not, standing alone, sufficient to support a finding that the land is partnership property. Estate of Mahoney (1939), 233 Wis. 138, 141, 142, 143, 288 N.W. 763, involved an inheritance tax proceeding. Two sisters operated a rooming house business on real estate purchased by one ......