Legal Opinion
Farrell v. United States
District Court, S.D. California
Decided October 11, 1961No. 421-61PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YANKWICH, District Judge.
The above entitled cause heretofore tried, argued and submitted is now decided as follows:
Upon the grounds stated in the Comment to follow, judgment will be for the defendant that the plaintiff take nothing by her action.
Costs to the Government.
Comment
In this action the plaintiff seeks to recover $9,357.76 federal estate taxes alleged to have been collected wrongfully. The question is whether the plaintiff was entitled to the marital deduction authorized by § 2056(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. (26 U.S.C.A. § 2056 (b).)
The last will and testament of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Estate of Edward A. Cunha, Deceased, Bank of America, National Trust and Savings Association v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- Kasper v. KellarCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1954
- California Trust Company v. RiddellDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1955
- Sbicca v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960
- Street v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Edwin O. Bookwalter, District Director of Internal Revenue v. Maude H. Lamar, Personally and as of the Estate of Frederick C. Lamar, DeceasedCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1963
- Estate of Harmon v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1985
- Estate of Carl I. Heim, Deceased, Isabelle J. Heim v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Lamar v. BookwalterDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1962
- In Re Tibbetts EstateSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.