Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

CAROLINE C. DOMMERICH, LOUIS F. DOMMERICH AND THE NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEWYORK, EXECUTORS OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF OTTO L. DOMMERICH,DECEASED, PROSECUTORS-APPELLANTS, v. WILLIAM D. KELLY, STATE TAXCOMMISSIONER, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a Supreme Court judgment on certiorari affirming a decree of the Prerogative Court imposing a transfer inheritance tax upon certain gifts inter vivos made by the decedent, Otto L. Dommerich. On certiorari, in matters of this character, it is the Supreme Court's prerogative and duty to find the facts. It is argued here that the Supreme Court did not find the facts independently of the Prerogative Court but merely approved the fact findings of that court. We cannot accept this view but think that the Supreme Court sufficiently found the facts and made its own conclusions thereon. That being so, the fact issue of whether the transfers were made in anticipation of death is res adjudicata and it is not open to us to arrive at a different fact conclusion (even on the assumption that we would be inclined so to do were we empowered to make an independent investigation and appraisal) so long as there was evidence to sustain the findings of fact of the Supreme Court.

The judgment under review is accordingly affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF JUSTICE, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, PORTER, COLIE, DEAR, WELLS, RAFFERTY, HAGUE, THOMPSON, DILL, JJ. 12.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DOMMERICH v. KELLY
(Sep 14, 1944)