TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Henshaw v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

HENSHAW Et Al. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Henshaw v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 31 F.2d 946 (9th Cir. 1929)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
April 1, 1929
Docket
No. 5648
Judges
Rudkin, Dietrich, Bean
Citations
31 F.2d 9467 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 86487 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 86481929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3602

Opinion — Dietrich

DIETRICH, Circuit Judge.

This is a petition to review an order of the United States Board of Tax Appeals, affirming an assessment of $604,789.87 as an estate tax upon the estate of William G. Henshaw, deceased, of the net value of $5,334,898.46. During all his married life the decedent resided in California, and all of his property was acquired after his marriage to Hetty T. Henshaw, who, together with three children, survived him. In short, it is conceded his entire estate was community property as defined by the laws of California, and a one-half interest therein passed to his widow by operation of law. Both husband and wife had their domicile in California at the time of the former’s death. Upon these facts the only question presented to us is whether the half interest so passing to Mrs. Henshaw was subject to the tax. Consistently with the conclusion reached in Talcott v. United States (C. C. A.) 23 F.(2d) 897 (certiorari denied 277 U. S. 604 , 48 S. Ct. 601 , 72 L. Ed. 1011 ) onr answer must he in the affirmative. In neither material fact nor statutory provision is there any distinction, and we fail to find in the petitioners’ elaborate brief sufficient reason for now taldng a different view.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1950: 119502026peak 1950 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Crocker First Nat. Bank of San Francisco v. United States183 F.2d 149 (1st Cir. 1950)

Most recent

  1. Crocker First Nat. Bank of San Francisco v. United States183 F.2d 149 (1st Cir. 1950)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Talcott v. United States, 23 F.2d 897 (9th Cir. 1928) 44

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list