§
Schmidlapp v. Comm'r

19 Cited authorities

  1. Helvering v. Hallock

    309 U.S. 106 (1940)   Cited 578 times
    In Hallock we emphasized our removal of that support by declaring that § 811(c) "deals with property not technically passing at death but with interests theretofore created.

  2. Estate of Sanford v. Comm'r

    308 U.S. 39 (1939)   Cited 361 times
    Holding that a court is not bound to accept as controlling stipulations as to questions of law

  3. Klein v. United States

    283 U.S. 231 (1931)   Cited 129 times
    In Klein v. United States, supra, decided in 1931, the decedent during his lifetime had conveyed land to his wife for her lifetime, "and if she shall die prior to the decease of said grantor then and in that event she shall by virtue hereof take no greater or other estate in said lands and the reversion in fee in and to the same shall in that event remain vested in said grantor,...

  4. U.S. Trust Co. v. Commissioner

    296 U.S. 481 (1936)   Cited 47 times
    In United States Trust Co. v. Commissioner, 296 U.S. 481, the grantor and the beneficiaries converted a single trust into several trusts, one for each of the beneficiaries, by exercising a power to amend which the grantor had expressly reserved to them.

  5. Matter of Durand

    164 N.E. 737 (N.Y. 1928)   Cited 129 times
    In Matter of Durand (250 N.Y. 45, 55) the court, speaking of intestate property, said: "The courts must leave it as if there were no will. No power of revision of wills is intrusted to the courts.

  6. Carrier v. Carrier

    123 N.E. 135 (N.Y. 1919)   Cited 118 times
    In Carrier v. Carrier, 226 N.Y. 114, 123 N.E. 135, the Court of Appeals of New York had under consideration trust provisions somewhat analogous to those involved herein.

  7. Matter of Trevor

    145 N.E. 66 (N.Y. 1924)   Cited 93 times
    In Matter of Trevor (239 N.Y. 6) the will was so construed that the interests of certain minors vested absolutely at the end of the second life. The majority also thought that the dominant purpose of the testator was such that it did not offend the statutes against perpetuities and applied the principle that invalid portions of a will can be excised and the sound parts preserved.

  8. Matter of Horner

    143 N.E. 655 (N.Y. 1924)   Cited 92 times
    In Matter of Horner (237 N.Y. 489, 495) it was said: "The provision that in given circumstances a share shall fall back into the general body of the trust and remain unsevered from the bulk is so subordinate in importance and so separable in function that we are at liberty to cut if off and preserve what goes before."

  9. Matter of Mount

    185 N.Y. 162 (N.Y. 1906)   Cited 141 times
    In Matter of Mount (185 N.Y. 162, supra) the testatrix devised her residuary estate to trustees to pay the income to a named sister during her life.

  10. Matter of Lyons

    271 N.Y. 204 (N.Y. 1936)   Cited 55 times

    Submitted April 14, 1936 Decided May 19, 1936 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department. Alexander Halpern, Charles H. Edwards and Albert W. Pross for Albert W. Pross et al., as executors of Malky Lyons, deceased, et al., appellants. Frederick A. Keck, as special guardian, and Fred L. Gross for Sylvia D. Spiegel et al., infants, appellants. Jacob Landy and Bernard Cahn for respondent. LEHMAN, J. The executors named in the will of Malky Lyons have filed their accounts and