The bixby liquidating trust

It was only after the natural objects of the trustor's bounty ceased to exist that the California law of succession was to take its course. IX expressly prohibits the trustors from doing anything, directly or indirectly, that would terminate the trust prior to the expiration of the fixed term thereof, to vest the unrestricted ownership, use, possession and control of trust corpus in themselves or in their appointees, at or prior to the expiration of the fixed term of the trust.

Without considering whether in confining his argument before us to the two questions just quoted, the Commissioner would be deemed to have abandoned some of the points argued by him before the Tax Court, Cf. Los Angeles Brewing Co., 9 Cir., 183 F.2d 398; Western National Ins. Similarly the trustor provided that upon termination of the trust the trust corpus was vested in and distributable to a particular class, namely, his or her then living issue, per stirpes; and if none survived, trust corpus was to go, upon termination of the trust, to the living heirs-at-law, the identity and respective shares to be determined by California law in force at the time of the trustor's death.

As such majority stockholders, these eight, as grantors, transferred to themselves, as "trustees," so-called, the stock of which during their lives they constituted themselves sole beneficiaries.Otherwise, a manifest injustice might be accomplished.Executed long before the events here in controversy, the instrument in question was drawn with great care and meticulousness."For the foregoing reasons the decisions vacated August 15, 1949 will be reentered." The decision of the Tax Court, based upon its two opinions, is now affirmed by the majority per curiam.In each of these pronouncements, that court examined with meticulous insistence a collateral question of local California law which they are incompetent to decide.

Leave a Reply