No. 1-3.106
LN THE SUPEXMI.! COUKT OF '1'HIi STATE OF MONTANA
1976
!W THL MATTER 3F THE ESTATE OF
ARTHUR J . MOSBY, a / k / a A. J. MOSBY,
Deceased.
i p p e d l from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e F o u r t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
Honorable Edward T. D u s s a u l t , Judge p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel af Record:
For A p p e l l a n t :
S k e l t o n & K n i g h t , M i s s o u l a , Montana
Robert Knight a r g u e d , M i s s o u l a , Montana
G a r l i n g t o n , Lohn and Robinson, M i s s o u l a , Montana
.Seorge Goodrich a r g u e d , M i s s o u l a , Montana
b o r Kespondent :
Boone, K a r l b e r g & Haddon, M i s s o u l a , Montana
K a r l K a r l b e r g a r g u e d , M i s s o u l a , Montana
Submitted : September 1, 1976
;
~ecided:$iij; j , ;;-
Mr. J u s t i c e Frank I . Haswell d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e C o u r t .
The q u e s t i o n i n t h i s case i s whether t h e widow's e l e c t e d
s t a t u t o r y s h a r e o f h e r d e c e a s e d h u s b a n d ' s e s t a t e , which q u a l i f i e s
f o r t h e m a r i t a l d e d u c t i o n and g e n e r a t e s no f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x
l i a b i l i t y , i s exempt from payment of a p r o p o r t i o n a l s h a r e of
the federal estate tax attributable t o the estate. The d i s t r i c t
c o u r t h e l d it exempt. W e reverse.
A r t h u r J. Mosby d i e d t e s t a t e , a r e s i d e n t of Missoula
County,Montana, on November 26, 1970. H i s w i l l p r o v i d e d , among
other things:
" T h i r d : I have made no p r o v i s i o n i n t h i s w i l l
f o r m w i f e , Ruth Greenough Mosby, s i n c e s h e h a s
y
a s e p a r a t e e s t a t e which i s more t h a n a d e q u a t e t o
m e e t her needs."
The w i l l w a s a d m i t t e d t o p r o b a t e i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t
o f Missoula County on December 2 1 , 1970.
I n March, 1971, Ruth Greenough Mosby, widow of A r t h u r J .
Mosby, by h e r g u a r d i a n , f i l e d a " R e n u n c i a t i o n of W i l l and E l e c t i o n
t o Take Dower and I n t e s t a t e S h a r e " p u r s u a n t t o t h e s t a t u t e t h e n
i n e f f e c t , s e c t i o n 22-107, R.C.M. 1947, which p r o v i d e s :
"Widow may e l e c t . Every d e v i s e o r b e q u e s t t o h e r
by h e r h u s b a n d ' s w i l l s h a l l b a r a widow's dower
i n h i s l a n d s and h e r s h a r e i n h i s p e r s o n a l e s t a t e
unless otherwise expressed i n t h e w i l l ; b u t she
may e l e c t whether s h e w i l l t a k e under t h e p r o v i -
s i o n s f o r h e r i n t h e w i l l o f h e r d e c e a s e d husband
o r w i l l renounce t h e b e n e f i t o f s u c h p r o v i s i o n s
f o r h e r , and t a k e h e r dower i n t h e l a n d s and h e r
s h a r e i n t h e p e r s o n a l e s t a t e under t h e s u c c e s s i o n
s t a t u t e s , a s i f t h e r e had been no w i l l , b u t n o t
i n e x c e s s o f t w o - t h i r d s (2/3) of t h e h u s b a n d ' s
n e t e s t a t e , r e a l and p e r s o n a l , a f t e r t h e payment
o f c r e d i t o r s ' c l a i m s , e x p e n s e s of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n
and any and a l l t a x e s , i n c l u d i n g s t a t e and f e d e r a l
i n h e r i t a n c e and e s t a t e t a x e s . "
The i n t e s t a t e s h a r e o f Ruth Greenough Mosby was o n e - t h i r d o f
t h e decedent's n e t e s t a t e i n accordance w i t h succession s t a t u t e ,
s e c t i o n 91-403 ( I ) , R.C.M. 1947. Ruth Greenough Mosby d i e d on
J a n u a r y 24, 1972.
The Mosby e s t a t e p a i d United S t a t e s f e d e r a l e s t a t e
t a x e s i n e x c e s s o f $230,000, i n c l u d i n g a d e f i c i e n c y payment
p l u s i n t e r e s t , by May o f 1975. T h e r e a f t e r t h e Mosby e s t a t e
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s f i l e d t h e i r r e p o r t and p e t i t i o n i n t h e d i s t r i c t
c o u r t , p r o p o s i n g t o d i s t r i b u t e t o t h e e s t a t e of Rugh Greenough
Mosby ( h e r e i n a f t e r t h e Greenough e s t a t e ) , o u t o f t h e p e r s o n a l
p r o p e r t y o f t h e Mosby e s t a t e , o n e - t h i r d o f t h e i n v e n t o r y and
a p p r a i s e m e n t v a l u e , less d e b t s , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e n s e s and
f e d e r a l e s t a t e taxes paid. The p e t i t i o n w a s s e r v e d on a l l i n -
t e r e s t e d persons.
One week l a t e r t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e Green-
ough e s t a t e f i l e d o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e Mosby e s t a t e r e p o r t and pe-
tition. H i s primary c o n t e n t i o n w a s t h a t t h e Greenough e s t a t e ' s
e l e c t e d i n t e s t a t e s h a r e c o n s i s t e d o f o n e - t h i r d of t h e p e r s o n a l
p r o p e r t y o f t h e Mosby e s t a t e reduced o n l y by t h e d e b t s o f A r t h u r
J. Mosby, b u t w i t h o u t r e d u c t i o n f o r c o s t s of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o r
federal e s t a t e tax. Following h e a r i n g s and on J a n u a r y 8 , 1976,
t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e n t e r e d a n amended o r d e r h o l d i n g , i n s o f a r a s
i s p e r t i n e n t t o t h i s a p p e a l , t h a t t h e Mosby e s t a t e was r e q u i r e d
t o d i s t r i b u t e t o t h e Greenough e s t a t e t h e i n t e s t a t e s h a r e o f Ruth
Greenough Mosby, reduced by d e b t s of A r t h u r J. Mosby, c o s t s of
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and Montana i n h e r i t a n c e t a x e s , b u t n o t s u b j e c t
t o payment of f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t e x p r e s s -
l y p r e d i c a t e d i t s r u l i n g upon t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
C o u r t o f Appeals f o r t h e N i n t h C i r c u i t i n Robinson v. U n i t e d
S t a t e s , 518 F.2d 1105 (1975) .
On J a n u a r y 1 6 , 1976, c o u n s e l f o r the Mosby e s t a t e and
c o u n s e l f o r F r e d a l i n e M. Yonce, o n e o f t h e r e s i d u a r y l e g a t e e s
o f A r t h u r J. Mosby, f i l e d a motion f o r r e h e a r i n g and motion t o
a l t e r and amend t h e amended o r d e r of J a n u a r y 8 , 1976. The mo-
t i o n a l l e g e d t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r o n e o u s l y r e l i e d upon
Robinson, s u p r a , and e r r o n e o u s l y a p p l i e d t h e r u l e o f " e q u i t a b l e
apportionment" t o t h e f a c t s before t h e c o u r t . They f u r t h e r
a l l e g e d t h a t t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e Greenough e s t a t e , p r i o r
t o h i s f i l i n g o b j e c t i o n s , a f f i r m a t i v e l y a c q u i e s c e d i n and a g r e e d
w i t h t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s t o t h e s h a r e of Ruth
Greenough Mosby; t h a t such a c q u i e s c e n c e c r e a t e d an i n e q u i t y t o
t h e remaining l e g a t e e s which s h o u l d p r e v e n t t h e Greenough e s t a t e
from b e n e f i t i n g from a n e q u i t a b l e a p p o r t i o n m e n t r u l e ; and t h a t
t h e Greenough e s t a t e ' s o b j e c t i o n s s h o u l d be b a r r e d by l a c h e s and
equitable estoppel. A f t e r a h e a r i n g on J a n u a r y 26, 1976, a t
which t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t h e a r d f u r t h e r arguments and a n o f f e r of
p r o o f , t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d e n i e d t h e motion i n a l l r e s p e c t s and
confirmed i t s amended o r d e r of J a n u a r y 8 , 1976.
The r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of t h e Mosby e s t a t e and F r e d a l i n e M.
Yonce, r e s i d u a r y l e g a t e e , a p p e a l from t h e amended o r d e r o f J a n -
u a r y 8 , 1976.
The c o n t r o l l i n g i s s u e on a p p e a l i s whether t h e widow's
e l e c t e d i n t e s t a t e s h a r e o f t h e d e c e d e n t ' s e s t a t e , which wholly
q u a l i f i e s f o r t h e m a r i t a l d e d u c t i o n under f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x l a w s ,
i s exempt from payment of a p r o p o r t i o n a t e s h a r e of t h e f e d e r a l
estate tax l i a b i l i t y .
S e c t i o n 2 0 5 6 ( a ) of t h e I n t e r n a l Revenue Code of 1954,
26 U.S.C. §2056(a), covers t h e m a r i t a l deduction. It a l l o w s a
deduction:
" * * * from t h e v a l u e of t h e g r o s s e s t a t e a n
amount e q u a l t o t h e v a l u e o f any i n t e r e s t i n
p r o p e r t y which p a s s e s o r h a s p a s s e d from t h e
decedent t o h i s surviving spouse, b u t only t o
t h e e x t e n t t h a t such i n t e r e s t i s included i n
d e t e r m i n i n g t h e v a l u e of t h e g r o s s e s t a t e . "
The maximum m a r i t a l d e d u c t i o n a l l o w a b l e , however, i s 50 p e r c e n t
of t h e v a l u e of t h e a d j u s t e d g r o s s e s t a t e . 26 U.S.C. §2056(c)(l).
I n t h i s c a s e t h e e l e c t e d i n t e s t a t e s h a r e of t h e Greenough
e s t a t e q u a l i f i e s f o r t h e m a r i t a l deduction. A s a consequence,
t h i s one-third e l e c t e d share does not c o n s t i t u t e a p o r t i o n of
t h e g r o s s e s t a t e and d o e s n o t c a u s e , c o n t r i b u t e t o o r g e n e r a t e
any f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x .
The Mosby e s t a t e and F r e d a l i n e M. Yonce, a residuary
l e g a t e e , argue t h a t because t h e e n t i r e estate i s l i a b l e f o r
payment o f f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s b e f o r e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e
widow's s h a r e , s u c h s h a r e s h o u l d b e a r i t s p r o p o r t i o n a l s h a r e o f
the federal e s t a t e tax. The Greenough e s t a t e , on t h e o t h e r
hand, c o n t e n d s t h a t no p a r t o f t h e f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x s h o u l d b e
d e d u c t e d from t h e widow's e l e c t e d s t a t u t o r y s h a r e a s s u c h s h a r e
g e n e r a t e s no t a x b e c a u s e o f t h e m a r i t a l d e d u c t i o n .
A t t h e o u t s e t w e observe t h a t t h e f e d e r a l estate t a x i s
a n e x c i s e t a x upon t h e t r a n s f e r o f a n e s t a t e upon t h e d e a t h o f
t h e owner a s d i s t i n g u i s h e d from a n i n h e r i t a n c e t a x imposed upon
the i n t e r e s t passing t o a particular distributee. I n re Glover's
E s t a t e , 45 Hawaii 569, 371 P.2d 361; S e a t t l e - F i r s t N a t . Bank v .
Macomber, 32 Wash.2d 696, 203 P.2d 1078. The f e d e r a l e s t a t e
t a x i s imposed upon t h e v a l u e o f t h e e s t a t e r e d u c e d by t h e m a r i t a l
deduction. Sec. 2 0 5 6 ( a ) o f t h e I n t e r n a l Revenue Code o f 1954,
26 U.S.C. Sec. 2 0 5 6 ( a ) . The p u r p o s e o f t h e m a r i t a l d e d u c t i o n
i s t o p e r m i t a noncomrnunity p r o p e r t y s t a t e t o a t t a i n e q u a l i t y o f
f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x t r e a t m e n t w i t h a community p r o p e r t y s t a t e i f
i t s l e g i s l a t u r e i s s o minded. Old Colony T r u s t Co. v . McGowan,
156 M e . 1 3 8 , 163 A.2d 538. It is not t o grant the surviving
widow a t a x exemption. I n re E s t a t e o f H u r l b u t , 1 2 6 V t 562, 238
A.2d 68; I n r e U i h l e i n ' s W i l l , 264 W i s . 362, 59 N.W.2d 641, 38
ALR2d 961. The m a r i t a l d e d u c t i o n i s f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f t h e en-
t i r e e s t a t e ; t h e s u r v i v i n g widow s h a r e s i n t h a t b e n e f i t w i t h o t h e r
d i s t r i b u t e e s b e c a u s e t h e g r o s s v a l u e o f t h e e s t a t e i s r e d u c e d by
t h e m a r i t a l deduction r e s u l t i n g i n a smaller f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x ;
s o t h e widow's d i s t r i b u t i v e s h a r e must b e a r i t s p r o p o r t i o n a t e
s h a r e o f t h e burden o f t h e f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x u n l e s s t h e u l t i -
mate burden i s o t h e r w i s e s h i f t e d under s t a t e law. I n re E s t a t e
o f H u r l b u t , s u p r a ; Old Colony T r u s t Co. V. McGowan, s u p r a .
Congress h a s n o t s e e n f i t t o a l l o c a t e t h e burden of
t h e f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x , b u t h a s l e f t i t t o s t a t e law t o d e t e r -
mine t h e u l t i m a t e t h r u s t o f t h e t a x ; t h u s t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e
u l t i m a t e burden of f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s i s o n e of s t a t e , r a t h e r
t h a n f e d e r a l , law. Riggs v . D e l Drago, 317 U.S. 95, 63 S.Ct.
1 0 9 , 87 L.Ed 106, 142 A R 1131 ( 1 9 4 2 ) ; E s t a t e o f Marans v . New-
L
l a n d , 143 Mont. 388, 390 P.2d 443.
I n i t i a l l y , we a r e c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e p l a i n l a n g u a g e of
s e c t i o n 22-107, R.C.M. 1947. This s t a t u t e states unequivocally
t h a t a widow may renounce and t a k e h e r i n t e s t a t e s h a r e of t h e
h u s b a n d ' s p e r s o n a l e s t a t e " a f t e r t h e payment of * * * any and
a l l taxes, including * * * federal * * * estate taxes." This
p r o v i s i o n would a p p e a r t o burden t h e Greenough e s t a t e ' s s h a r e
with a proportionate share of t h e f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x .
However, t h e N i n t h C i r c u i t C o u r t o f Appeals i n Robinson
v . United S t a t e s , 518 F.2d 1105, 1108 ( 1 9 7 5 ) , d e c i d i n g a c a s e
a r i s i n g under t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f a w i l l and t h e e s t a t e t a x l a w s
of t h e United S t a t e s , c o n s t r u e d Montana law o t h e r w i s e :
"Accordingly, w e f i n d t h a t under Montana l a w
f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s , u n l e s s t h e i r payment i s
otherwise s p e c i f i c a l l y provided f o r i n t h e w i l l ,
must be e q u i t a b l y a p p o r t i o n e d among r e s i d u a r y
i n t e r e s t s s o t h a t a r e s i d u a r y i n t e r e s t n o t gen-
e r a t i n g any e s t a t e t a x e s d o e s n o t b e a r any burden
f o r payment of such t a x e s . "
I n Robinson, t h e " r e s i d u a r y i n t e r e s t n o t g e n e r a t i n g any e s t a t e
t a x e s " was t h e widow's t e s t a m e n t a r y o n e - t h i r d of t h e r e s i d u e
which, a s i n t h i s case, f u l l y q u a l i f i e d f o r t h e m a r i t a l deduc-
t i o n under 26 U.S.C. 52056. The Robinson c o u r t h e l d t h a t :
" * * * t h e s h a r e p a s s i n g t o t h e s p o u s e i s one-
t h i r d of t h e r e s i d u a r y e s t a t e b e f o r e payment o f
f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s and t h a t t h e e s t a t e i s en-
t i t l e d under 82056 o f t h e I n t e r n a l Revenue Code t o
d e d u c t t h e f u l l amount of t h e i n t e r e s t p a s s i n g t o
t h e spouse."
The d i s t r i c t c o u r t i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e h e l d t h a t t h e e q u i t a b l e
a p p o r t i o n m e n t r u l e announced i n Robinson a p p l i e d w i t h e q u a l
f o r c e t o t h e Greenough e s t a t e ' s e l e c t e d s t a t u t o r y s h a r e q u a l i f y -
ing f o r t h e m a r i t a l deduction.
The c o u r t o f a p p e a l s i n Robinson r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e
burden of t h e e s t a t e t a x w a s a q u e s t i o n o f s t a t e law, b u t a l s o
r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e r e w e r e no Montana c a s e s d i r e c t l y i n p o i n t
w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n b e f o r e it. The f e d e r a l a p p e a l s c o u r t t h e n
proceeded t o d e t e r m i n e " a s b e s t it c a n what t h e s t a t e c o u r t would
decide". I t t h e n looked t o o u r d e c i s i o n i n E s t a t e o f Marans v .
Newland, 143 Mont. 388, 390 P.2d 443, f o r g u i d a n c e and found t h a t
t h e c o n t r o l l i n g r a t i o n a l e t h e r e i n was t h a t a widow's s h a r e o f a
d e c e a s e d h u s b a n d ' s e s t a t e which d i d n o t g e n e r a t e a f e d e r a l e s t a t e
t a x w a s exempt from p a y i n g a p r o p o r t i o n a t e s h a r e o f s a i d t a x . We
t h e r e f o r e must d e c i d e i f t h e Robinson d e c i s i o n c o r r e c t l y r e a d s
Marans and a p p l i e s t o t h e f a c t s o f t h e i n s t a n t c a s e .
I n Marans, t h e s p e c i f i c i s s u e w a s whether s e c t i o n 22-107
--
s h o u l d impose a t a x burden from n o n p r o b a t e assets upon t h e widow's
e l e c t e d i n t e s t a t e s h a r e of t h e husband's e s t a t e . The e f f e c t o r
a p p l i c a b i l i t y of t h e m a r i t a l d e d u c t i o n w a s n o t i n i s s u e . The
d e c e a s e d h u s b a n d ' s e s t a t e was l a r g e l y i n t h e form o f p r o p e r t y
j o i n t l y owned by him and h i s son and d a u g h t e r . This nonprobate
property s u b s t a n t i a l l y increased t h e e s t a t e ' s tax l i a b i l i t y . The
widow renounced t h e w i l l and e l e c t e d t o t a k e h e r s t a t u t o r y s h a r e .
I t a p p e a r e d t h a t if t h e widow w e r e r e q u i r e d t o d i s c h a r g e t h e e n t i r e
e s t a t e t a x l i a b i l i t y from h e r i n t e s t a t e s h a r e o f t h e r e s i d u e ,
t h e n s h e would be l e f t w i t h o u t any p r o p e r t y t o i n h e r i t . This Court
h e l d t h a t a r u l e o f e q u i t a b l e a p p o r t i o n m e n t would be invoked t o
p r e v e n t t h e d i s i n h e r i t a n c e o f a widow under s e c t i o n 22-107 where
t h e b u l k of t h e f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s was g e n e r a t e d by n o n p r o b a t e
assets. T h e r e f o r e , e s t a t e t a x e s were o r d e r e d t o be a p p o r t i o n e d
between t h e widow's r e s i d u e and t h e c h i l d r e n ' s n o n p r o b a t e a s s e t s .
Marans d i d n o t h o l d t h a t t h e widow w a s exempt from payment o f
a l l f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s ; r a t h e r , s h e w a s n o t r e q u i r e d t o pay any
p a r t of t h e f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x which a r o s e from t h e n o n p r o b a t e
property.
The o v e r r i d i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f Marans was e x p r e s s e d by
t h i s C o u r t a t 394-395 of 143 Mont.:
" * * * I f * * * t h e l e g i s l a t u r e i n t e n d e d t o sub-
o r d i n a t e t h e widow's s t a t u t o r . s h a r e t o t a x e s
y
g e n e r a t e d by non-probate a s s e t s , t h e e f f e c t of
t h e s t a t u t e [ s e c t i o n 22-1071 would be t o c u t o f f
t h e widow's o n l y means o f p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t
'tax disinheritance,' i.e., her option t o take
a g a i n s t t h e w i l l and n u l l i f y t h e t e s t a t o r ' s ex-
p r e s s e d i n t e n t i o n r e l a t i v e t o t h e t a x e s w i t h which
h e r s h a r e would be encumbered. I n view of t h e
p o l i c y of t h e law t o p r o t e c t a widow from d i s i n -
h e r i t a n c e , a s r e f l e c t e d by t h e v e r y s t a t u t e under
c o n s i d e r a t i o n * * * w e do n o t impute t o t h e l e g i s -
l a t u r e t h e i n t e n t t o g i v e and t a k e away i n one
s t a t u t o r y pronouncement." (Emphasis s u p p l i e d . )
While t h e r e s u l t o f Marans i s sound, t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t o f
a p p e a l s m i s a p p l i e d i t i n t h e Robinson c a s e . Robinson d i d n o t
d e a l w i t h t h e problem o f t h e t a x burden imposed by n o n p r o b a t e
p r o p e r t y , n o r d i d it c o n c e r n s e c t i o n 22-107. Marans h e l d t h a t
t a x e s g e n e r a t e d by n o n p r o b a t e p r o p e r t y would n o t be c h a r g e d t o
d i s i n h e r i t a widow; Robinson went c o n s i d e r a b l y f u r t h e r and h e l d
t h a t p r o p e r t y n o t g e n e r a t i n g t a x would be exempt from a l l t a x
liability. Marans d i d n o t announce t h i s l a t t e r p r o p o s i t i o n .
W e hold t h a t t h e e q u i t a b l e apportionment r u l e adopted i n
Marans d o e s n o t a p p l y t o t h e i n s t a n t case. The p a r t i e s a g r e e
t h a t t h e Mosby e s t a t e i s a l m o s t wholly comprised of p r o b a t e a s s e t s .
~ h u s h e r e i s no i n e q u i t a b l e burden imposed upon t h e widow's s h a r e
t
by n o n p r o b a t e a s s e t s . I n t h e a b s e n c e of a c o m p e l l i n g e q u i t a b l e
argument, a s w a s made i n Marans, we c a n f i n d no l e g a l o r p o l i c y
j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h e exemption of a n u n d i v i d e d o n e - t h i r d i n t e r e s t
i n t h e g r o s s e s t a t e from t h e payment of t a x e s w h i l e r e q u i r i n g t h e
o t h e r two-thirds t o bear t h e burden. T h i s w a s t h e view expressed
i n t h e o p i n i o n o f Hon. James F . B a t t i n , f e d e r a l d i s t r i c t j u d g e
i n Robinson v . U n i t e d S t a t e s , 369 F.Supp. 925 ( 1 9 7 4 ) , which was
l a t e r r e v e r s e d by t h e N i n t h C i r c u i t C o u r t o f A p p e a l s i n 518 F.2d
1105.
W e r e c o g n i z e t h e c o n f l i c t o f a u t h o r i t y from o t h e r j u r i s -
d i c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r a q u a l i f i e d m a r i t a l
d e d u c t i o n which g e n e r a t e s no t a x s h o u l d b e a r a n y b u r d e n o f f e d -
e r a l e s t a t e tax. Under t h e f a c t s o f t h i s c a s e , where t h e widow
renounced and t o o k h e r i n t e s t a t e s h a r e p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 22-
1 0 7 , R.C.M. 1947, w e a r e c o n s t r a i n e d t o f o r e g o f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s
o f t h e c o n f l i c t i n g c a s e s and f o l l o w t h e e x p r e s s d i r e c t i o n o f o u r
statute. The mandate o f t h e s t a t u t e i s t h a t t h e Greenough e s t a t e ' s
e l e c t e d i n t e s t a t e s h a r e i s s u b j e c t t o i t s p r o p o r t i o n a t e payment
of f e d e r a l e s t a t e taxes.
This holding renders i r r e l e v a n t t h e o t h e r i s s u e s presented
i n t h i s appeal.
The d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s amended o r d e r o f J a n u a r y 8 , 1976,
i s r e v e r s e d i n s o f a r a s it o r d e r s t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e Mosby
e s t a t e t o d i s t r i b u t e o n e - t h i r d of t h e p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y o f t h e
e s t a t e t o t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e Greenough e s t a t e exempt
from payment o f f e d e r a l e s t a t e t a x e s . T h i s c a s e i s remanded t o
t h e d i s t r i c t court with directions t o order t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of
t h e p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y o f t h e Mosby e s t a t e i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h i s
opinion.
Justice
- 9 -