Estate of John Kenly, Deceased, Betty B. Kenly, Personal Representative - Page 20

                                                 - 20 -                                                   
                  The lesson of Commissioner v. Estate of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456                             
            (1967), is that, respondent, having been absent from the State                                
            court proceeding that established rights to the decedent’s                                    
            property, is entitled to her day in Federal court, unless she                                 
            could not there prevail.  The California court did not explain                                
            the basis of its determinations5; we do not know whether the                                  
            California court was determining a question of California law as                              
            to community property or was relying on the unopposed averments                               
            made by petitioner that the Bard property was community property.                             
            Therefore, we cannot rule out that respondent, had she been                                   
            present in the California court, would have prevailed in opposing                             
            petitioner’s claim that the Bard property was community property.                             
            The situation here is not unlike the situation we faced in Estate                             
            of Rowan v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 633, 638 (1970) (Bosch applied;                             
            State court decision concerning ownership of property of decedent                             
            (including community property) not determinative:  “On the record                             
            before us, there is no explanation of how and why the State court                             
            reached its decision.”).  We conclude that we are not bound by                                
            the determinations of the California court, and we will not                                   
            follow those determinations.                                                                  
                  C.  Decedent’s Acquisition of an Interest in                                            
                  the New Mexico Ranch                                                                    
                  Decedent acquired an interest in the New Mexico ranch when                              
            that property was bought and paid for by decedent’s father.  The                              

            5     See supra note 1.                                                                       

Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011