Legal Opinion
In re the Estate of Arbib
New York Surrogate's Court
Decided July 6, 1925PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
O’Brien, S.
The application to modify the order fixing the transfer tax is denied. The decedent was a resident of this State. The money belonging to him in the Republic of France was not tangible property. The recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Frick v. Pennsylvania (268 U. S. 473) holds that a State has no jurisdiction to impose a tax on the transfer of tangible property physically situated outside the State of domicile. Tangible property is synonymous with “ goods, wares and merchandise.” (Matter of Brooks, 119 Misc. 738; affd., 212 App. Div. 868.)
The cases cited by the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Blackstone v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Frick v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Bullen v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- In Re the Appraisal for Taxation of the Estate of HoudayerNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- In re the Transfer Tax on the Estate of BrooksNew York Surrogate's Court · 1922
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cannata v. Town of DeerfieldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1989
- In re the Estate of BijurNew York Surrogate's Court · 1926
- Sturges Manufacturing Co. v. Utica Mutual InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1973
- In re the Estate of LoneyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1928