Estate of Opal v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
A New York joint and mutual will contained specific and explicit wording that its dispositive provisions were made in consideration of each other and were to be irrevocable. By subsequent clauses the makers devised and bequeathed residuum, each to the other, "absolutely and forever," and thereafter provided that upon the death of the survivor of the makers, residuum was devised and bequeathed to their son.
Read the full summary
A New York joint and mutual will contained specific and explicit wording that its dispositive provisions were made in consideration of each other and were to be irrevocable. By subsequent clauses the makers devised and bequeathed residuum, each to the other, "absolutely and forever," and thereafter provided that upon the death of the survivor of the makers, residuum was devised and bequeathed to their son. Held: The use of the phrase "absolutely and forever" in the dispositive provisions in favor of the respective makers is considered along with the other language of the will to determine…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Petitioner and her husband executed a joint last will and testament, leaving Edward’s property to Mae. (Respondent contends that the property interest passing to Mae from Edward does not qualify for the marital deduction under section 2056.2
He argues that: (1) Under Few York law Mae is contractually bound to devise and bequeath to Warren the unconsumed portions of the property which came to her from Edward; and that (2) because of the limitations imposed on the use of the property by reason of this contractual obligation, her interest in the property is in effect a life estate with…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Rastetter v. . HoenningerNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Helvering v. O'DONNELLSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Tillman v. . OgrenNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- In Re the Probate of the Will of SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Estate of Edward F. Pipe, Deceased, Nettie M. Pipe v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Estate of Craft v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977
- Estate of Edward N. Opal, Deceased, Mae Opal, Now by Remarriage Known as Mae Konefsky v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1971
- Estate of Park v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
- Estate of Krampf v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1971
- Estate of Neugass v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.