- 5 -
The issues remaining3 for us to decide are as follows:
1. Whether any portion of the $750,000 settlement Eckell,
Sparks paid to the administrators pro tem. and the residuary
beneficiaries of decedent’s estate (the Glovers) should be
allocated to (a) the value of the estate’s claim for the $247,500
of legal fees that the Orphans’ Court ordered Eckell, Sparks to
return to decedent’s estate and/or (b) to the value of the claims
the Glovers made against Eckell, Sparks, with the consequences that
the amount of any such allocation is not included in the value of
decedent’s claim against Eckell, Sparks on the date of her death.
2. If we determine that no portion of the $750,000
settlement is allocable to the Glovers’ claims, then whether that
portion (60 percent) of the $750,000 Eckell, Sparks settlement that
was distributed to the Glovers is a deductible expense in
determining decedent’s taxable estate.
3 In its answering brief, decedent’s estate:
a. Conceded that attorney’s fees of $247,500 paid to
the law firm of Eckell, Sparks, Monte, Auerback & Moses
that the Orphans’ Court ordered be returned to
decedent’s estate are not deductible as administrative
expenses pursuant to sec. 2053(a)(2).
b. Failed to address and, therefore, is deemed to
have conceded that commission of $250,000 paid to
Madelyn M. Hurley, the original executrix of decedent’s
estate, is not deductible as an administrative expense
pursuant to sec. 2053(a)(2) nor deductible as a theft
loss pursuant to sec. 2054.
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