State v. Hogg, 1677-6416.
Decision Date | 02 May 1934 |
Docket Number | No. 1677-6416.,1677-6416. |
Parties | STATE v. HOGG et al. |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
This is a suit under the inheritance tax laws of this state. It appears that the state of Texas, by its Attorney General and by the criminal district attorney of Harris county, Tex., there being no county attorney in such county, sued Mike Hogg as executor of the will and estate of W. C. Hogg, deceased, who died September 30, 1930, and 23 other individuals to whom bequests of property passed under the will of W. C. Hogg, deceased, to recover inheritance taxes and penalties claimed to be due the state of Texas by virtue of the inheritance statutes of this state, and by reason of the bequests so made to such 23 individuals.
It appears that the above 23 individuals, who are defendants herein, are all named as beneficiaries and legatees in the will of W. C. Hogg, deceased; that none of them were related to deceased in any degree; that all such legatees are residents of this state; and that all such devises are to be used in this state. In this connection, it does not appear from the record that there is any stipulation in the will as to where such devises are to be used.
As we understand this record, the sole and only questions presented to us for decision are whether the statutes of this state in force at the time of the death of W. C. Hogg provided for a tax on these bequests, and, if so, should the penalty interest of 2 per cent. per month beginning with the date of notice of the assessment thereof to the executor be charged against such bequests. The county judge failed to certify such claimed amounts to the respective appellees themselves, but did certify same to the executor.
As to the liability for taxes on the property bequeathed to them, these individual legatees submitted this case in the two lower courts on one contention, which is that, because they were not related to the testator in any degree, will use the bequests in the state, and were all residents of the state at the time of testator's death, the bequests to them were not taxed under our inheritance tax statutes as they existed at the time of the death of the testator. The district court and Court of Civil Appeals both sustained the appellees' contention. In this condition of the record, the two lower courts did not reach the penalty interest question.
The statutes directly and indirectly involved in the decision of this case are as follows:
Article 7117 ( ).
Article 7118. "If passing to or for the use of husband or wife, or any direct lineal descendant or ascendant of the decedent, or to legally adopted child or children, or to the husband of a daughter or the wife of a son, the tax shall be one per cent on any value in excess of twenty-five thousand dollars, and not exceeding fifty thousand dollars; two per cent on any value in excess of fifty thousand dollars, and not exceeding one hundred thousand dollars; three per cent on any value in excess of one hundred thousand dollars, and not exceeding two hundred thousand dollars; four per cent on any value in excess of two hundred thousand dollars and not exceeding five hundred thousand dollars; five per cent on any value in excess of five hundred thousand dollars, and not exceeding one million dollars; and six per cent on any value in excess of one million dollars."
Article 7119....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Trapp v. Shell Oil Co.
...535, 537, Ann.Cas.1913A, 699: "This court must sustain it unless its invalidity be apparent beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Hogg, 123 Tex. 568, 70 S.W.2d 699; on rehearing 123 Tex. 578, 72 S.W.2d 593: "* * * the rule is that every possible presumption is in favor of the constitutionali......
-
Community Public Service Co. v. James
...the owner of property and which are assessed upon a valuation basis, are practically universally held to be excise taxes. State v. Hogg, 123 Tex. 568, 70 S.W.2d 699, 72 S.W.2d 593. Use taxes are also generally so classified, as for example our automobile license tax. For all practical purpo......
-
Hill v. Gibson Discount Center
...an interpretation which renders it void, when it is susceptible of another interpretation that renders it valid. State v. Hogg, 123 Tex. 568, 70 S.W.2d 699 (1934); State of Texas v. Shoppers World, Inc., 380 S.W.2d 107 (Tex.Sup.1964); and the statute must be sustained if it can be done by f......
-
Salonen v. Farley, 343.
...intended to do an unfair, unjust, or unreasonable thing.' 39 Tex.Jur. 225; Crim. v. Austin, Tex.Com.App., 6 S.W.2d 348; State v. Hogg, 123 Tex. 568, 70 S.W. 2d 699, 72 S.W.2d It would seem to me that the legislature had a right to create a cause of action and designate what person or person......