State Land Bd. v. Schwabe
Citation | 240 Or. 82,400 P.2d 10 |
Parties | State of Oregon, acting by and through its STATE LAND BOARD, Appellant, v. Peter SCHWABE, as administrator of the Estate of Antek Kolek, deceased, Peter Schwabe, as administrator of the Estate of Maria Kolek Sroczynski, deceased, Karolina Kolek Sekula and her husband, Joe Doe Sekula, Truman W. Owen and Doris D. Owen, husband and wife, and all other persons, heirs, or parties claiming any right, title and interest in and to the real property described in the Information herein, Respondents. |
Decision Date | 17 March 1965 |
Court | Supreme Court of Oregon |
Walter L. Barrie, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem, argued the cause for appellant. On the briefs with him was Robert Y. Thornton, Atty. Gen., Salem.
Peter A. Schwabe, Sr., Portland, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was Peter A. Schwabe, Jr., Portland.
Before McALLISTER, C. J., and SLOAN, GOODWIN, HOLMAN and LUSK, JJ.
In this case we are concerned with reciprocal rights of inheritance under ORS 111.070, that existed in 1954 between citizens of the United States and those of the Polish People's Republic.
John Kolek, a resident of Washington, died in 1954 owning real property in Benton County, Oregon. His heirs were residents of Poland. The problem is to decide if, in 1954, the rights of inheritance prescribed by ORS 111.070 could be met by citizens of Poland. The statute makes three requirements: 1. The reciprocal right of a citizen of Oregon to take an inheritance from an estate in Poland; 2. The unequivocal right of a citizen of the United States to receive property inherited from an estate in Poland, and. 3. The right of the Polish citizen to use and control property inherited from estates in Oregon without confiscation of any part of the inheritance by the Polish government. State Land Board v. Pekarek, 1963, 234 Or. 74, 378 P.2d 734.
The evidence in the cases consisted primarily of a certificate of the Polish Ambassador to the United States that in 1954 there was a free, reciprocal flow of property passing by inheritance between citizens of the two countries and that no part of an inheritance due a citizen of Poland would be confiscated by that government.
And, plaintiff relied on United States Treasury Department Circular No. 655, dated February 19, 1951, in which Poland was listed as a nation in which it was doubtful that checks drawn against the funds of the United States would be received by payees in the countries listed. This ban on the sending of Federal checks to Poland was lifted on June 7, 1957. In State Land Board v. Pekarek, supra, 234 Or. at page 82, 378 P.2d 734, we gave this circular prevailing weight over claims of reciprocity made by a certificate of the Ambassador from...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Zschernig v. Miller, 21
...existing within their borders do not always comport with the actual facts.' Id., at 83, 378 P.2d, at 738. Yet in State Land Board v. Schwabe, 240 Or. 82, 400 P.2d 10, where the certificate of the Polish Ambassador was tendered against the claim that the inheritance would be confiscated abro......