Majority
Headnote
Inheritance Tax Law—Duty of Appraiser—Duty of Probate Court to Follow Statutory Procedure—Appeal by State Controller. The duties of an inheritance tax appraiser, differing from those of general probate appraisers, are to report on the character and probable value of so much of the estate as is liable for the inheritance tax and to determine whether transfers have been made by the decedent' which are subject to inheritance taxation. A hearing of a report of the inheritance tax appraiser before the probate court upon notice, a determination by the court after such hearing, and an authorization to the county treasurer to receive the inheritance tax when such formal proceedings have been taken, is provided by the law, and independently of whether the state sustains any loss through a course followed by the court differing from this, the state controller is entitled to insist that the procedure as outlined by the statute be followed. An order of final distribution made and later amended nunc fro tunc determining the amount of the inBy the will of Laura J. Haskins, deceased, all of her estate was given to her step-son, George M. Haskins. This will was duly admitted to probate and all probate proceedings thereunder were regularly had and taken. The time came when the estate was ready to be closed, and George M. Haskins, above named, who was also the executor of the estate, filed his final account and report and therewith his petition for distribution. It was set forth, and on the hearing shown, that the estate consisted of $1055.39 in money; that there were no offsets against this amount for claims or credits or disbursements. Erroneously the petition declared that no inheritance tax was chargeable or payable upon the inheritance of George M. Haskins or upon any of the property of the estate. Thereupon the court settled the final account and distributed the whole of the estate to George
It is not in question but that the amount of the inheritance tax which the court thus decreed is the amount justly due to the state under the law. (Inheritance Tax Law, 1911, secs. 2, 3 and 4, Stats. 1911, p. 713, et seq.) The procedure, however, which the court adopted, it is urged, is so at variance with the law governing the matter as to call for a reversal, with directions to the court in probate to proceed in conformity with that law. To the method of procedure laid down we are thus brought.
Section 1444 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it originally stood, made provision for the appointment of three appraisers, any two of whom may act, and who perform the familiar function of appraisers of estates in probate. As amended in 1911, that section now prescribes that the judge must appoint of the three probate appraisers one who is an inheritance tax appraiser. Section' 14 of the Inheritance Tax Act of 1913 [Stats. 1913, p. 1076], provides that the state controller shall appoint “one or more persons in each county of the state to act as inheritance tax appraisers therein. Every such inheritance tax appraiser (in addition to any fees paid him as appraiser under section 1444 of the Code of Civil Procedure) shall be paid by the county treasurer out of any funds that he may have in his hands on account of said tax, on presentation of a sworn itemized account and on the certificate of the superior court, at the rate of five dollars per day for every day actually and necessarily employed in said inheritance tax appraisement, together with his actual and
With these provisions before us (and they are thus elaborately set forth, not because of their consequence in this litigation, but because the state has asked a definition of the powers and duties of our courts in probate), we may briefly sum up the matter. The controller names one or more inheritance tax appraisers in each county. The court in probate names three disinterested appraisers for each estate in probate. Of these appraisers in probate, one must, and the the others may or may not (within the discretion of the court in probate) be selected from the list of authorized inheritance tax appraisers within the county. There is no compulsion in the law upon the court in probate to appoint more than one inheritance tax appraiser as a probate appraiser. It does be
While the appraisers in probate report upon the character and probable value of all the properties of the estate, the duties of the inheritance tax appraiser are essentially different. He is to report upon the character and probable value of so" much of the estate as is liable for the inheritance tax, and, still further, he is to determine whether transfers of property have been made by the deceased of such nature as to render the property transferred liable to the inheritance tax. (Estate of Reynolds, 169 Cal. 600 , [ 147 Pac. 268 ].)
Furthermore, the law contemplates notice and a hearing of the report of such inheritance tax appraiser, a determination by the court after such hearing, and an authorization to the county treasurer to receive the inheritance tax when such formal proceedings have been taken. The state itself may justly he heard to complain if the course prescribed by its own law is not followed, and it is not a sufficient answer to say that in the individual case no wrong has resulted. Judicially we cannot upon this bench know whether error has been com
The decree appealed from is reversed, with directions to the trial court to pursue, in the matter of the closing of the estate, the course prescribed by law.
Lorigan, J., and Melvin, J., concurred.
Cases cited
- In re Estate of Reynolds 169 Cal. 600 p. 272