Legal Opinion

Clemens v. Franchise Tax Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 29, 1959No. Civ. 23145PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerndon, J.

The issues of law presented by this appeal are essentially the same as those involved in the companion case of Burnham v. Franchise Tax Board, ante, p. 438 [341 P.2d 833], this day decided.

Appellant was at all material times a California resident and domiciliary. She is a life beneficiary of a testamentary trust created by her father, a Canadian resident whose estate was probated in Canada. The trustee is the Guaranty Trust Company of Canada, a Canadian corporation and the branch administering the trust is located in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada.

During the period involved, the corpus of the trust…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Anderson v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  2. Burnham v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Burgess v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Crocker-Anglo National Bank v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  2. State ex rel. Arizona Department of Revenue v. ShortCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
  3. MCA, Inc. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  4. Christman v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. Gray v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API