Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
PENNSYLVANIA CO. FOR INSURANCES ON LIVES AND GRANTING ANNUITIES et al. v. BROWN, Late Acting Collector of Internal Revenue, 1934 — 70 F.2d 269 · caselaw · US
Corporations
PENNSYLVANIA CO. FOR INSURANCES ON LIVES AND GRANTING ANNUITIES et al. v. BROWN, Late Acting Collector of Internal Revenue
70 F.2d 269·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1934
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
PENNSYLVANIA CO. FOR INSURANCES ON LIVES AND GRANTING ANNUITIES et al. v. BROWN, Late Acting Collector of Internal Revenue.
No. 5255.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
March 20, 1934.
Benjamin 0. Frick, of Philadelphia, Pa. (Evans, Bayard & Frick, of Philadelphia, Pa., of counsel), for appellants.
Charles D. MeAvoy, U. S. Atty., of Philadelphia, Pa., Thomas J. Curtin, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Philadelphia, Pa. (E. Barrett Pret-tyman, Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and Pereia 'E. Miller, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for appellee.
Before WOOLLEY, DAVIS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a decree of the District Court disallowing a deduction of $327,-861.24 from the gross estate of Theodore C. Bimbaum claimed under section 303 (a) (3) of the Revenue Act of 1924 (26 USCA § 1095 note), which allows a deduction for all bequests made “to or for the use of any corporation organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, ¥ * * or educational purposes.”
The learned trial judge disallowed the deduction for the reason that the amount of the residuary bequests the charities designated in paragraph “Nineteenth, (i)” of the decedent’s will could not be determined at the time of his death with any reasonable certainty.
We are in entire accord with his conclusions, and affirm the decree for the reasons set forth in his opinion.
Affirmed.