Legal Opinion · Dissent

Brock Estate

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 22, 1966No. Appeal, 51Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Me. Justice Roberts:

I am unable to agree that the Principal and Income Act, of 19471 mandates that capital gains2 distributions of regulated investment companies or mutual funds be allocated to principal. My consideration of the problem leads me to conclude that a more reasonable construction of that Act would dictate an allocation to income.

Section 5(1) of the Principal and Income Act of 1947 provides that “where the trustee shall have the option of receiving a dividend, either in cash or in the shares of the distributing corporation, it shall be considered as a cash…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Pew TrustSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Gardner v. SeymourSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
  3. In re the Estate of ByrneNew York Surrogate's Court · 1948
  4. Coates v. CoatesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1957
  5. Tait v. PeckMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1963

2 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