People v. Starring

Decision Date05 October 1916
Docket NumberNo. 10731.,10731.
PartiesPEOPLE v. STARRING et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from County Court, Cook County; John H. Williams, Judge.

Proceedings by the People of the State of Illinois to assess an inheritance tax on the estate of Nannie G. Minzesheimer. From the judgment, the executors appeal. Affirmed.

John S. Lord, of Chicago, for appellants.

P. J. Lucey, Atty. Gen., and Thomas J. Young, of Chicago, for the People.

COOKE, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the county court of Cook county assessing an inheritance tax in the estate of Nannie G. Minzesheimer. The estate was appraised at $99,699.40. Mrs. Minzesheimer was a widow, and left surviving her no descendants. By her last will and testament she devised the residue of her estate, appraised at $93,584.20, to Mason B. Starring and William Reiss to hold in trust for a period of 20 years from her decease for the following purposes: To pay one-third of the net income derived therefrom in quarterly installments to her sister May Goodman; two-ninths to her sister Lottie Newlander; two-ninths to her brother, David Goodman; and the remaining two-ninths to her nephews, Arthur D. Marks, Sampson T. Marks, and Lester Goodman, in equal portions. The will then provided that, in case May Goodman should die before the termination of the trust, then the share of the income that would have been paid to her had she lived should be paid to her sister Lottie Newlander and her nephew Edwin Newlander in equal portions, and, if either should die before the termination of the trust, then the whole should be paid to the survivor. In case her brother, David, should die before the termination of the trust, then his share of the income should be paid to May Goodman, and, in case she should die, then David's share should be paid to Lottie Newlander and Edwin Newlander, or the survivor of them, in equal portions. In case Lottie Newlander should die before the termination of the trust, it was provided that her share of the income should be paid to Edwin Newlander and May Goodman, or the survivor of them. The will then provided that upon the termination of the 20-year period the trustees should divide the estate into four equal parts, and distribute to May Goodman, Lottie Newlander, and David Goodman each one part, and to Arthur Marks, Sampson T. Marks, and Lester Goodman one part, to be divided equally among them. It will thus be seen that sevenninths of the income from the trust estate was made payable to her brother and two sisters for a period of 20 years, with the provision that, should her said brother and sisters all die before the termination of the 20 years, seven-ninths of the income from the trust estate should be paid to Edwin Newlander for the remainder of the trust period.

The only question to be determined is whether section 25 of the Inheritance Tax Act should be applied in determining the amount of inheritance tax which should be assessed. Section 25 provides that, when property is transferred or limited in trust or otherwise, and the rights, interests, or estates of the transferees or beneficiaries are dependent upon contingencies or conditions whereby they may be wholly or in part created, defeated, extended, or abridged, a tax shall be imposed upon said transfer at the highest rate which on the happening of any of the contingencies or conditions would be possible under the provisions of the act, and such tax so imposed shall be due and payable by the executors or trustees out of the property transferred. It also provides that upon the happening of any contingency whereby the property, or any part thereof, is transferred to any person taxable at a rate less than the rate imposed and paid, such person shall be entitled to a return of so much of the tax imposed and paid as is the difference between the amount paid and the amount which said person, corporation, or institution should pay under the inheritance tax laws, with interest thereon at the rate of 3 per cent. per annum from the time of payment. The county court applied section 25, and charged Edwin Newlander, a nephew of the testatrix, with sevenninths of the income from the trust estate for the period of 15 years, assuming that May Goodman, David Goodman, and Lottie Newlander would die within five years after the death of the testatrix. By this method Edwin Newlander was charged with $29,535.89 and the total tax assessed was $2,134.95. Appellants contend that this assessment is erroneous, and insist...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Wonderly v. Tax Comm'n of Ohio
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • April 16, 1925
    ...398, c. 120, Illinois Revised Statutes, 1923. The construction placed upon this section of the Illinois statute in People v. Starring, 274 Ill. 289, 113 N. E. 627, resulted in a tax levied at the highest rate possible in case the event or contingency occurred immediately. The following case......
  • Tax Comm'n of Ohio v. Oswald
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • December 4, 1923
    ...N. Y. 260, 123 N. E. 366;People v. Donohue, 276 Ill. 88, 114 N. E. 513;People v. Byrd, 253 Ill. 223, 97 N. E. 293; and People v. Starring, 274 Ill. 289, 113 N. E. 627. [Ohio St. 55]If this method of taxation seems harsh, the remedy for the situation is in the Legislature, and not in the cou......
  • People v. Upson
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • February 21, 1930
  • People v. Lowenstein
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • June 20, 1918
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT