Legal Opinion

Kuchel v. Tolhurst

California Supreme Court

Decided July 9, 1952No. L. A. 22060PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.

The State Controller appeals from a judgment decreeing that no inheritance tax is due the State of California from respondent Shelley Rollins Tolhurst on certain property received by him under the last will and testament of his deceased mother, and that, in effect, all inheritance taxes due from him on such property have been paid and discharged in full. We have concluded that the judgment is correct and should be affirmed.

Respondent was the executor and sole beneficiary under his mother’s will, which was probated in proceeding No. 286201 in Los Angeles ‘County. In December, 1948, the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Jorgensen v. JorgensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Estate of RathCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Bermite Powder Co. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Gale v. WittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Neblett v. Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Cal.California Supreme Court · 1943

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Estate of TalbotCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  2. Estate of WhelanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. McElhinney v. RigantiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  4. Osterloh v. FlournoyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API