Case ID: mass_215/html/0031-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Loring, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charles H. W. Foster & others, trustees, vs. City of Boston. Same vs. Inhabitants of Brookline. Same vs. Inhabitants of Milton. Same vs. Inhabitants of Westwood.
    Suffolk. Norfolk.
    December 12, 1912.
    May 24, 1913.
    Present: Rugg, C. J., Hammond, Loring, Braley, & Sheldon, JJ.
    
      Tax, Assessment. Trust. Partnership.
    
    Upon petitions for the abatement of taxes brought by the trustees under a deed of trust called the “General Investment Trust,” by the terms of which the powers and duties of the trustees were essentially the same as those of the petitioners in Williams v. Milton, ante, 1, it was held, following that decision, that the beneficiaries were cestuis que trust and were not partners, and that the trust property was to be assessed for taxation accordingly.
   Loring, J.

These are four petitions for the abatement of taxes like those brought in Williams v. Milton, ante, 1. These are brought by the trustees under a deed of trust called the General Investment Trust. The decision in Williams v. Milton is decisive of the true character of the General Investment Trust. It is a trust and the cestuis que trust are not partners. It follows that the plaintiffs 'are entitled to an abatement in the petition against the city of Boston, but not in the other petitions.

J. E. Searle, for the plaintiffs.

W. P. Higgins & R. M. Walsh, for the city of Boston, submitted brief.

W. H. White, for the town of Brookline,

F. Rackemann, for the town of Milton.

W. G. Rowe, for the town of Westwood.

So ordered.