Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Pennsylvania Co. For Banking & Trusts v. United States, 10289_1 (1950)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Number: 10289_1 Visitors: 47
Filed: Nov. 13, 1950
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 185 F.2d 125 50-2 USTC P 10,785 PENNSYLVANIA CO. FOR BANKING & TRUSTS v. UNITED STATES. No. 10289. United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit. Argued Nov. 7, 1950. Decided Nov. 13, 1950. Elizabeth B. Davis, Washington, D.C. (Theron Lamar Caudle, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ellis N. Slack, Sp. Asst., to the Atty. Gen., Gerald A. Gleeson, U.S. Atty., Thomas J. Curtin, Asst. U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant. Philip M. Hammett, Philadelphia, Pa. (C. Walter Randall, Jr., Saul, Ewi
More

185 F.2d 125

50-2 USTC P 10,785

PENNSYLVANIA CO. FOR BANKING & TRUSTS
v.
UNITED STATES.

No. 10289.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Argued Nov. 7, 1950.
Decided Nov. 13, 1950.

Elizabeth B. Davis, Washington, D.C. (Theron Lamar Caudle, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ellis N. Slack, Sp. Asst., to the Atty. Gen., Gerald A. Gleeson, U.S. Atty., Thomas J. Curtin, Asst. U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Philip M. Hammett, Philadelphia, Pa. (C. Walter Randall, Jr., Saul, Ewing, Remick & Saul, Philadelphia, on the brief), for appellee.

Before GOODRICH, KALODNER and HASTIE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

This case presents the question whether United States bonds owned by a non-resident alien but physically present in this country at the time of the alien's death are to be included in the decedent's gross estate and subject to federal estate tax. The District Court, following the Second Circuit decision in Jandorf's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 1948, 171 F.2d 464, held that the bonds were not to be considered in measuring the estate tax. D.C.E. Pa. 1950, 91 F. Supp. 237.

2

We agree with the District Court and with the Second Circuit. The question is a close one. All the points considered for and against the imposition of the tax were thoroughly considered in the Second Circuit opinion and, in turn, incorporated in the opinion of the District Court. We do not think that anything we can say can add to the very thorough discussion which the narrow problem has already received.

3

The judgment of the District Court will be affirmed.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer