Flournoy

Flournoy v. Amar

Good Law
1967 Cal. App. LEXIS 1288·255 Cal. App. 2d 404·63 Cal. Rptr. 444
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 26, 1967Civ. No. 31777California1,405 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Stephens, J.

Eloi J. Amar died on May 24, 1963, and his will was duly admitted to probate in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. A state inheritance tax appraisement and report were made, dated Stepember 30, 1964, and a hearing on the report was set for October 20, 1964. On that date the report was approved and the tax set at $725.28. This amount was paid on November 6, 1964. Thereafter, a federal estate tax return was made, and the amount of state tax actually paid was allowed as a credit against the am mint, found to be due the federal government. Final distribution of the estate was made, and the eo-exeeutors were discharged by order of the superior court on April 2, 1965. Thereafter, on November’ 18, 1966, the appointed state inheritance tax appraiser filed a “supplemental” report with the court in the probate proceeding, claiming a further amount of tax due under Revenue and Taxation Code, section 13441. 1 This section provides for the so-called “additional” or “pickup” tax. In essence, it allows the state to take advantage of a revenue raising opportunity afforded it by the federal government. The federal government allows an amount as a credit against the federal estate tax due…

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.