Wahl v. Sheehan, 918.
Citation | 54 F. Supp. 56 |
Decision Date | 26 January 1944 |
Docket Number | No. 918.,918. |
Parties | WAHL et al. v. SHEEHAN et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
John S. Leahy and Herbert E. Barnard, both of St. Louis, for plaintiff.
Harry C. Blanton, U. S. Atty., of Sikeston, Mo., and Russell Vandivort, Asst. U. S. Atty., of St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
Action to recover estate taxes paid to the Collector of Internal Revenue by the estate of John B. Wahl under protest. John B. Wahl, an elderly bachelor of means, died in November, 1937. When his effects were inventoried there was found in his safe deposit box a sealed envelope containing twenty-five $1,000 Federal Reserve Bank notes. On the sealed envelope appeared the following in Mr. Wahl's handwriting: "Personal — Her Property". On one side of the envelope in the handwriting of Mrs. Minnie S. Tucker (the widow of Arthur Tucker) appeared the following:
On the other side of the envelope, also in the handwriting of Mrs. Tucker, appeared the following:
The evidence shows that all of the notations appearing on the envelope in the handwriting of Mrs. Tucker were placed there under the following circumstances:
Mr. Wahl and Mr. and Mrs. Tucker, during Mr. Tucker's lifetime, were close friends. After the death of Mr. Tucker in 1924, the friendship between Mr. Wahl and Mrs. Tucker continued, the former spending much time at the home of Mrs. Tucker and her niece Mrs. Tatum. One afternoon in August, 1935, Mr. Wahl visited Mrs. Tucker. A neighbor, Mrs. Henfling, was there. When Mr. Wahl entered the apartment he took an empty envelope out of his pocket, and asked Mrs. Tucker to sit down at her secretary and to write upon the envelope what he dictated. After a few words had been dictated by Wahl and written by Mrs. Tucker, Mrs. Henfling attempted to excuse herself but was asked by Wahl to remain. Noting that the handwriting of Mrs. Tucker was too large, Mr. Wahl destroyed that envelope, produced another and told Mrs. Tucker to write smaller in order that there might be space on the envelope for all he desired should be placed there. Standing behind Mrs. Tucker's chair he dictated and Mrs. Tucker wrote on the empty envelope that which has been set out above. After the writing was finished Mrs. Tucker handed the envelope to Mr. Wahl, who read what had been written and said: He did not say what would be in the envelope nor did he at any time thereafter give it to her. She did not see it again until after his death when it was, as heretofore stated, found in his safe deposit box, sealed with sealing wax and containing twenty-five $1,000 bills. Mr. Wahl had previously often told Mrs. Tucker that he had had an arrangement with her husband and that he, Mr. Wahl, would make an arrangement with her. He at no time had told her what that arrangement would be. Prior to 1935 he remarked to her:
Mr. Wahl died suddenly one evening in November, 1937, at Mrs. Tucker's when he, Mrs. Tucker and several friends were playing cards.
After Mr. Wahl's death his executors refused to deliver the envelope containing the $25,000 to Mrs. Tucker. She employed an attorney and suit was filed therefor. The action was contested and resulted in a decree for Mrs. Tucker. A motion for new trial was filed. Both the executors and Mrs. Tucker were represented by eminent and able counsel. There was no understanding or agreement between them up to that time. After the decree was entered, counsel for the executors offered to compromise by the payment of the principal amount sued for if Mrs. Tucker would waive the interest amounting to approximately $3,000. This offer was accepted and counsel for the executors prepared another judgment and decree which was substituted for the former (which had been prepared by Mrs. Tucker's counsel). This latter judgment contained findings, not in the former decree, which were peculiarly apropos to the present position of the estate concerning its liability for estate taxes on this $25,000. No appeal was taken from the latter judgment and it had become final long prior to the institution of this action.
This cause was transferred to this Division by Honorable George H. Moore. While the cause was pending before Judge Moore the question was raised by motion as to whether the decree of the State Court was binding in this action on the question of ownership, by the estate, of the $25,000.00 in question.
On May 13, 1943, Judge Moore entered the following order:
The Third, Fourth and Fifth defenses and the Motion to Strike and to Dismiss were as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wahl v. Wahl
...(2d) 251; Eschen v. Steers, 10 F. (2d) 739; Coon v. Stanley, 94 S.W. (2d) 96; Napier v. Eigel, 164 S.W. (2d) 908, 350 Mo. 111; Wahl v. Sheehan, 54 F. Supp. 56; Krause v. Jeannette Inv. Co., 62 S.W. (2d) l.c. 895, 333 Mo. 509; Harding v. St. Louis Union Trust Co., 207 S.W. 68, 276 Mo. 136; S......
-
Wahl v. Wahl
... ... Eschen v. Steers, 10 F.2d 739; Coon v ... Stanley, 94 S.W.2d 96; Napier v. Eigel, 164 ... S.W.2d 908, 350 Mo. 111; Wahl v. Sheehan, 54 F.Supp ... 56; Krause v. Jeannette Inv. Co., 62 S.W.2d l.c ... 895, 333 Mo. 509; Harding v. St. Louis Union Trust ... Co., 207 S.W. 68, ... ...