Court Opinion

ID: 9637161
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 14:59:29.451135+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:54.067545
License: Public Domain

WILBUR, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
I dissent. The appellant paid a just tax due and owing from her deceased husband, Gay W. Parsons, to the Government of the United States. She intended to do exactly what she did do. The majority conclude that if she did not intend to make a gift to the Government she can recover this tax so paid. I know of no decision supporting such doctrine; none is cited by the parties nor by the majority in their opinion. The motive which activates a person who pays another’s tax is entirely immaterial unless the person acts under duress.1 The appellant, by her protest, made clear the reason why she paid the tax of her husband. The husband had died without any property except that which he held in joint tenancy with his wife. His death deprived his estate of the means of paying the tax because that means had vested in the appellant. She paid the tax because she feared she would be held liable for it as a transferee and that the liability would be doubled because of the delay in payment. This was not duress.

 Stahmann v. Vidal, 305 U.S. 61, 64, on page 64, 59 S.Ct. 41, on page 42, 83 L.Ed. 41, and cases cited in note 6.