Legal Opinion

Mather v. MacLaughlin

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided January 1, 1932No. 16440PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DICKINSON, District Judge.

This rule must be made absolute. We think this case was properly tried and submitted to the jury except in the respect that we inadvertently so submitted it as to perhaps convey to the jury the impression that the act of Congress in declaring that the fact that a gift was made within two years of death should be “deemed and held” to have been one made “in contemplation of death” meant that the one fact was merely prima facie evidence of the other. Revenue Act 1926, § 302 (e), 26 USCA § 1094 (e). This, although an inadvertant error, was none the less an error. A gift…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. United States v. KleinSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  3. Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  4. Schlesinger v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. SimonsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Baker v. GFC Corp. (In Re Baker)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri · 1980
  2. Thompson v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1957
  3. Boulton v. General Finance Loan Corp. (In Re Boulton)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Iowa · 1980
  4. United States v. SmithDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 1945
  5. Clark v. Savings & Trust Co. of Pennsylvania (In Re Clark)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1981

6 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