At the time of her death, she owned real estate situate in the State of New York, and certain personal property on deposit in a safe deposit company in the City of New York. The testatrix and her husband had lived for many years at Morristown, New Jersey. The question presented in this case is the validity of a collateral inheritance tax on certain property bequeathed to plaintiffs in error by Emily M. JUSTICE BREWER delivered the opinion of the Court.
The facts, which involve the constitutionality of §§ 1 and 15 of the New York Inheritance Tax Law, are stated in the opinion. 483 of the Laws of 1887, for taxing personalty of nonresident decedents who had owned realty in that state, are not unconstitutional as denying to those interested in estates of that class of decedents due process or equal protection of the laws, because no provision is made for taxing personalty of nonresident decedents who had not owned any realty in New York. The provisions in the New York Inheritance Tax Law, c. So far as the federal Constitution is concerned, the power of the state in respect to taxation is very broad, and includes exemption of certain classes of property from taxation to which other property is subjected, and different classes may be taxed by different methods of procedure without violating the due process and equal protection provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. 477 ERROR TO THE SURROGATE'S COURT OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, STATE OF NEW YORK Syllabus
0 kommentar(er)
