- 15 -
judgment on the alternative ground that “if the Redemption
Agreement diminished the value of the stock, it equally
diminished the value of the gross estate.” Petitioners maintain
that the Redemption Agreement took effect no later than the
moment of decedent’s death and thus imposed any value-lessening
constraints on the stock as it existed in the gross estate, prior
to any distribution to beneficiaries. This argument is
essentially the converse of the first point on which respondent
moves for partial summary judgment. Because we grant
respondent’s motion on such point for the reasons discussed
immediately below, we hold that petitioners are not entitled to
summary judgment on their postulated alternative basis.
We therefore will deny petitioners’ motion in its entirety.
II. Respondent’s Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
A. Unitary, Unrestricted Gross Estate Valuation
Respondent asks this Court to find as a matter of law that,
for gross estate purposes, “decedent’s voting and non-voting
stock interest in the Schwan Corporation which was held in a
revocable trust (“1992 Trust”) at the time of his death should be
valued as a unitary holding, unrestricted by the terms of the
1992 Trust, the terms of the redemption agreement he executed
prior to his Death (“Pre-Death Redemption Agreement”) or the
terms of the Schwan Corporation by-laws”. As indicated above,
petitioners advance the contrary view that the Redemption
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011