JAMES S. McCULLOCH, LEGATEE UNDER THE WILL OF MYRTLE REED McCULLOCH, DECEASED v. STATE OF ILLINOIS.
Case summary
Claimant sought a refund of inheritance taxes paid on contingent interests that later vested, under Section 25 of the Inheritance Tax Law. The court awarded $1,843.55 plus 3% interest from the original payment date.
Statutes cited: Section 25, Inheritance Tax Law
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- INHERITANCE TAX-when claimant entitled to refund under Sec. 25.
JAMES S. McCULLOCH, LEGATEE UNDER THE WILL OF MYRTLE REED
McCULLOCH, DECEASED
v.
STATE OF ILLINOIS.
Opinion filed April 26, 1921.
INHERITANCE TAX-when claimant entitled to refund under Sec. 25.
There being no dispute as to the facts and law governing this claim the Court holds that claimant is entitled to a refund of inheritance tax under Section 25, Inheritance Tax Law.
Edward J. Brundage, Attorney General, for State.
This is a claim for refund of inheritance taxes paid in the estate of Myrtle Reed McCulloch, deceased, based upon section 25, of the inheritance tax law.
The evidence shows that decedent died August 17th, 1911, a resident of Cook County, Illinois, leaving a will, which was admitted to probate, and claimant was appointed executor.
Thereafter June 11, 1912, a tax of twenty-two hundred and thirtyfour and 10/100 dollars, ($2,234.10) was assessed against certain contingent interests in said estate at the "highest rate" under section 25, of the Inheritance Tax Law, which tax plus interest at 6% per annum, was on September 14, 1912, paid to the County Treasurer of Cook County, the interest being $66.27, and the total sum being $2,300.37.
On December 6th, 1920, the said interests having vested indefinitely in claimants, the County Court of said county entered an order re-assessing the tax of $418.74. This amount, plus $27.03 interest, substracted from the amount of original payment $2,300.37, leaves $1,- 843.55, due claimant with 3% interest per annum, thereon from September 14th, 1912, the date of said payment.
There is no dispute as to the evidence, and the Attorney General consents to allow of same. It is therefore ordered by the Court that payment be made to claimant in the sum of $1,843.55, together with 3% interest per annum, thereon from September 14th, 1912, until paid.