Estate of Damon

Damon v. McDougald

Good Law
10 Cal. App. 542·1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 335·102 P. 684
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 6, 1909Civ. No. 572.California464 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

The appeal is from an order of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco directing the widow, sole devisee under the will of said James E. Damon, deceased, to pay $1172, “inheritance tax,” under the act of the legislature approved March 20, 1905.

Appellant’s only contention seems to be that said law is repugnant to the constitution of the state and especially to the fourteenth amendment of the constitution of the United States. The argument is based principally upon the theory that there is a discrimination between the citizens of this state and those of other states, but it would be a sufficient answer to say that it does not appear to which class appellant belongs and hence—granting such discrimination—it cannot be determined that appellant is an aggrieved party. What was said in Estate of Johnson, 139 Cal. 534 , [ 96 Am. St. Rep. 161 , 73 Pac. 425 ], might well, therefore, be invoked: “A court will not decide a constitutional question unless such construction is absolutely necessary; and in the Mahoney case, since the appellants were aliens and claimed no protective rights as citizens, no constitutional question was involved. It would have been sufficient in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.