- 8 - “overbuilt” in that restoration costs exceeded the completed home’s fair market value. The insurance companies’ unilateral agreement to reimburse policyholders for restoration of residences, even though the costs exceeded their policy obligations, was, in great part, responsible for restoration costs that exceeded the completed market value of the residences. On August 22, 1996, the coexecutors petitioned the probate court for and received a waiver to permit distribution of the rebuilt residence to Thomas at the previously agreed value of $750,000. Thomas, on December 17, 1996, entered into an exclusive listing with a real estate agent to place the residence on the market for an asking price of $995,000. Ultimately, the residence was sold for $1,030,000 on March 18, 1997. OPINION Decedent’s home was destroyed by fire and was being restored at the time of her death. Her estate, relying on an appraisal, included $612,000 in the gross estate as the fair market value of the residence, which was 57 percent complete. Also included in the gross estate was an amount exceeding $700,000 that the estate estimated would be due from the insurance carrier for future reimbursement upon completion of the restoration of the residence. Finally, the gross estate was reduced by an amount exceeding $800,000 that the estate estimated would be due to the contractor, if the construction of the residence was completed.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011