Estate of Siegel v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Decedent and his wife executed mutual wills containing certain language of a nature that would contractually bind them to dispose of their collective estate in a specified manner. Held: Under New York law, the independent contractual language contained in the wills created a contract which was binding upon the survivor.
Read the full summary
Decedent and his wife executed mutual wills containing certain language of a nature that would contractually bind them to dispose of their collective estate in a specified manner. Held: Under New York law, the independent contractual language contained in the wills created a contract which was binding upon the survivor. The interest received by the surviving spouse by virtue of the decedent's will was therefore terminable within the meaning of sec. 2056(b)(1), I.R.C. 1954, and fails to qualify for the marital deduction. Estate of Edward N. Opal, 54 T.C. 154 (1970), affd. 450 F.2d 1085 (2d…
1Opinion of the Court
Estate of David A. Siegel, Leonard J. Siegel, Executor, Charlotte Helweil, Executrix, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Estate of Siegel v. Commissioner
Docket No. 1481-74
United States Tax Court
67 T.C. 662; 1977 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 166;
January 12, 1977, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
Decedent and his wife executed mutual wills containing certain language of a nature that would contractually bind them to dispose of their collective estate in a specified manner. Held: Under New York law, the independent contractual language contained in the wills created a…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- In re the Accounting of United States Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1957
- Edson v. . ParsonsNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Estate of Emerson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977
- Rastetter v. . HoenningerNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Tutunjian v. VetzigianNew York Court of Appeals · 1949
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.