RHODE ISLAND HOSPITAL TRUST COMPANY v. United States

Decision Date21 April 1965
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 2899.
PartiesRHODE ISLAND HOSPITAL TRUST COMPANY and Marjorie G. Horton, Co-Executors under the Will of Holton W. Horton, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island

Walter F. Gibbons, James T. Lodge, Joseph G. Kinder, of Armstrong, Gibbons & Lodge, Providence, R. I., for plaintiffs.

Thomas F. Field, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Raymond J. Pettine, U. S. Atty., William J. Gearon, Asst. U. S. Atty., Providence, R. I., for defendant.

DAY, District Judge.

This is an action brought under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1346(a) to recover the sum of $14,185.85 in Federal estate taxes and interest thereon of $1004.67 alleged to have been erroneously assessed against and collected from the estate of Holton W. Horton, deceased. Timely claim for the refund thereof was made by the plaintiffs and denied. By agreement of the parties, the matter has been submitted to this Court for decision upon an agreed statement of facts and the depositions of certain witnesses.

The only question presented for determination is whether or not the proceeds of a certain life insurance policy were includable in the gross estate of the decedent, Holton W. Horton, for tax purposes pursuant to the provisions of Section 2042 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. § 2042.

According to the agreed statement of facts, the decedent was born on March 29, 1906. He was one of two sons born to Charles A. Horton and his wife, Louise K. Horton. His brother, A. Trowbridge Horton was born on November 1, 1904 and is still living. Louise K. Horton died on January 9, 1952. Holton W. Horton died on April 1, 1958, and Charles A. Horton on October 2, 1961.

At the time of the death of Holton W. Horton there was in full force and effect a policy of life insurance on his life in the face amount of $50,000, issued by the Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company. This policy had been issued on April 3, 1924 when Holton W. Horton was eighteen years old. An identical policy was issued by said company on the life of his brother, A. Trowbridge Horton, on or about the same date. The beneficiaries of each of these policies, when issued, were Charles A. Horton and Louise K. Horton, in equal shares, or the survivor of them.

Both of said policies were purchased by Charles A. Horton so that there would be funds available for Louise K. Horton if her husband and either or both of her sons should die during her life-time. Charles A. Horton kept said policies in his safe deposit box and paid all the premiums thereon until his death in October, 1961. He regarded both policies as belonging to him and not to his sons. Since his death, A. Trowbridge Horton has paid the premiums on the policy insuring his life and has had possession of said policy since November, 1962 when it was delivered to him by the executors of his father's estate.

Subsequent to the death of Louise K. Horton, on January 9, 1952, Charles A. Horton was the sole beneficiary of said policy on the life of the decedent, and continued to be the sole beneficiary thereof until March 25, 1952 when Holton W. Horton, at the direction of his father, executed a change of beneficiary of said policy. (Exhibit 1). Under the terms of this change of beneficiary, upon the death of Holton W. Horton, the proceeds of said policy were to be retained by the insurer and interest thereon was to be paid monthly to Charles A. Horton with the right in him to withdraw the whole or any part of the proceeds retained by said insurer, or elect settlement under any other optional settlement contained in said policy. Said change of beneficiary further provided that if said Charles A. Horton should elect settlement under another option provided in said policy, then upon his subsequent death, any remaining unpaid installments provided by said policy under such other option so elected should be paid as they respectively fell due to the insured's wife, Marjorie G. Horton, if living, otherwise to A. Trowbridge Horton, with the right in each of them at any time while receiving such installments to withdraw the then present value of her or his share of the remaining installments.

This change of beneficiary remained in effect until the death of Holton W. Horton on April 1, 1958. Pursuant to its terms, the Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company thereafter paid the face amount of said policy to his father, the said Charles A. Horton.

As hereinbefore recited, the parties have agreed that this case be submitted for decision on the basis of a trial record consisting of said agreed statement of facts which I have just summarized, (2) the depositions of Marjorie G. Horton and A. Trowbridge Horton, and (3) the deposition of Walter F. Gibbons, Esquire (subject to my ruling on the admissibility of the testimony of Mr. Gibbons).

In her deposition, Marjorie G. Horton, widow of Holton W. Horton, testified that she had never seen the policy involved herein; that many years before his death Holton had mentioned it to her and that he had told her that "his father had as an investment a policy on himself and another on `Trow' (his brother) but that in no way did it mean anything to us or would it ever. It was completely his." She also testified that Holton W. Horton had three small policies of life insurance on his own life, wanted additional life insurance but could not obtain it because of his health.

A. Trowbridge Horton, in his deposition, testified that while he and his late brother were students at a local preparatory school in 1924, his father purchased identical policies of life insurance on their respective lives and that "we did not recognize that we became the owners of those policies"; that his father paid all the premiums and kept them in a safe deposit box to which neither he nor his brother ever had access. He also testified that he never knew he could have obtained a loan on said policy, and, accordingly, never asked his father if he could borrow upon it. In addition, he testified that his father purchased said policies upon his life and that of his brother to make provision for his mother in case he, his father and his brother predeceased her; that he never discussed the policy involved herein with his brother and that his only conversation with his father about said policies, prior to his mother's death, was when his father told him he was paying premiums for insurance on his life and that of his brother; and that after his mother's death and without any discussion between them as to the advisability of a change in the beneficiary named in the policy on his life, his father directed him to go to the local office of the insurance company and to sign a form changing the beneficiary in said policy. He also stated that he had no discussion with his father after his brother's death about the policy on the latter's life and stated that he always considered the policy on his own life to be the property of his father.

After an examination of the testimony of Walter F. Gibbons, Esquire, I am of the opinion that his testimony as to the declarations made to him by Charles A. Horton relative to said policies is admissible under the provisions of Rule 43(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Although admittedly hearsay, I am satisfied that they were made in good faith, prior to the commencement of this action, and upon his personal knowledge. Such declarations would be clearly admissible in evidence in the courts of Rhode Island, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9-19-11 of Chapter 19 of the General Laws of Rhode Island, 1956. Foster v. De Andrada, 1959, 88 R.I. 442, 149 A.2d 713; Rhode Island Hospital Trust Company v. Letendre, 1950, 77 R.I. 411, 75 A.2d 203.

Mr. Gibbons, one of counsel for the plaintiffs, testified in his deposition that he first met Charles A. Horton when he interviewed him on June 5, 1959 in his investigation of the facts "surrounding an insurance policy involved in the estate of Holton Horton"; that Charles A. Horton told him that when his two sons were nineteen and eighteen years of age respectively, it occurred to him that it would be a good idea to insure the lives of his sons so that if he were to die before...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Silver v. Jordan
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • June 1, 1965
    ... ... Phill SILVER, as a citizen of the United States and of the State of California, etc., ... ...
  • United States v. Rhode Island Hospital Trust Company, 6618.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • January 11, 1966
    ...submitted to the district court upon an agreed statement of facts and depositions. The district court found for the plaintiffs, D.R.I., 1965, 241 F.Supp. 586, and the government The facts, undisputed, are of two kinds: "intent facts" — those relating to the conduct and understanding of the ......
  • Schwager v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • August 4, 1975
    ...where the incidents of ownership possessed are only nominal was rejected by the Court of Appeals. Rhode Island Hospital Trust Co. v. United States, 241 F.Supp. 586, 590 (D. R.I. 1965), revd. 355 F.2d 7 (1st Cir. 1966). In Estate of Lumpkin v. Commissioner 474, F.2d 1092 (5th Cir. 1973), rev......
  • Estate of Infante v. Commissioner
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • July 22, 1970
    ...States v. Rhode Island Hospital Trust Company 66-1 USTC ¶ 12,639, 355 F. 2d 7 (C. A. 1, 1966), vacating 65-1 USTC ¶ 12,318 241 F. Supp. 586 (D. R. I. 1965); Cockrill v. O'Hara 69-2 USTC ¶ 12,610, 302 F. Supp. 1365 (1969), and Tom J. Kearns, Jr. 68-2 USTC ¶ 12,543, 185 Ct. Cl. 227 (1968), 39......
  • 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