Legal Opinion

Russell v. Cogswell

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided April 22, 1940No. 34,239PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The supplemental opinion of the court was delivered by

Hoch, J.:

It was stated in the opinion filed in this case on January 27, 1940 [ante, p>. 14, 98 P. 2d 179), that in view of the conclusions reached on other questions involved, the court considered it unnecessary to pass upon the plaintiff’s contention that there is no provision in the Kansas inheritance tax law under which a tax can validly be imposed upon property passing by deed, grant or gift, “made or intended to take effect in possession or enjoyment after the death of the grantor.” We have now given consideration to the facts of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Crooks v. HarrelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  2. McFeely v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  3. State v. MollierSupreme Court of Kansas · 1915
  4. Landrum v. FlanniganSupreme Court of Kansas · 1899
  5. Russell v. CogswellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1940

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Harris v. ShanahanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1963
  2. Fort Hays State University v. Fort Hays State University ChapterSupreme Court of Kansas · 2010
  3. Egnatic ex rel. Egnatic v. WollardSupreme Court of Kansas · 1943
  4. Amoco Production Co. v. Armold, Director of TaxationSupreme Court of Kansas · 1974
  5. State Ex Rel. Stephan v. MartinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1982

20 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