Tax Comm. v. Bank & Tr. Co.
Decision Date | 21 December 1927 |
Docket Number | 20356 |
Citation | 117 Ohio St. 443,159 N.E. 570 |
Parties | Tax Commissioner Of Ohio v. The Security Savings Bank & Trust Co. Of Toledo, Trustee, Et Al. |
Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Inheritance tax - Exemptions - Successions passing to public charity - Section 5334, General Code - Inapplicable where property used for profit and accumulation devoted to charity - Succession limited to Masons, their families and clergymen, not exempt.
1. The provision of Section 5334, General Code, "The succession to any property passing * * * to or for the use of an institution for purposes only of public charity * * * shall not be subject to the preceding sections of this subdivision," does not apply to the succession of property to be used for a period of not less than fifty nor more than sixty years exclusively for profit and the multiplication of profits, even though such property add its accumulation is thereafter to be dispensed as a public charity, the purpose of the testator being not alone to dispense a public charity but also to increase and augment the estate he has left.
2. The succession of property to a trustee to be used for the purpose of dispensing charity only to aged Master Masons their wives, widows and dependent orphans, or superannuated clergymen, is not a succession of property "for purposes only of public charity." (Morning Star Lodge v. Hayslip 23 Ohio St. 144, approved and followed.)
Otis Avery Browning died testate on July 28, 1923. His last will and testament was duly probatedi n the probate court of Lucas county, Ohio. In his last will and testament he provided (division No. 4):
The executors of the will of Otis Avery Browning filed an application in the probate court of Lucas county for that court to determine the inheritance tax due upon the succession of the estate to the various legatees and devisees under the will, including the Security Savings Bank & Trust Company of Toledo, Ohio. That court found the total actual net market value of the succession...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Pike Cnty. Coroner's Office
..." Karabin v. State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. , 10 Ohio St.3d 163, 166, 462 N.E.2d 403 (1984), quoting Tax Comm. v. Sec. Savs. Bank & Trust Co. , 117 Ohio St. 443, 450, 159 N.E. 570 (1927). When the General Assembly inserted the CLEIR exception in R.C. 313.10(A)(2), it did so without providing a d......
-
Seaman's Estate, In re
...statutes since that time and now appears in Section 5731.09, Revised Code. In Tax Commission of Ohio v. Security Savings Bank & Trust Co. of Toledo, 117 Ohio St. 443, at page 450, 159 N.E. 570, at page 572, it is said in the opinion by Robinson, 'We are unable to draw a distinction between ......
-
Philada Home Fund v. Board of Tax Appeals
...will be unanimous.'The amendment was agreed to.'7 As Judge Robinson said in Tax Commission of Ohio v. Security Savings Bank & Trust Co. of Toledo, Trustee, 117 Ohio St. 443, 450, 159 N.E. 570, 572: 'The Legislature is presumed to know the decisions of this court * * *.' The principle would ......
-
Saccucci v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
...is presumed to have used them in the sense that they have been so defined or construed * * *.' Tax Comm. of Ohio v. Security Savings Bank & Trust Co. (1927), 117 Ohio St. 443, 450, 159 N.E. 570. "In the past, this court has used the term 'stacking' to mean the lumping or adding together of ......