Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Capital gain (2)
- Internal Revenue Code (2)
- 1946 Model Probate Code (1)
- Aggregate of property (1)
- Aggrieved person (1)
-
- Amortization (1)
- Asset (1)
- Board of adjustment (1)
- Capital expenditure (1)
- Chain-of-title (1)
- Contingent future interest (1)
- Covenant (1)
- Death (1)
- Deed (1)
- Easement (1)
- Equitable servitude (1)
- Estate tax (1)
- Fiduciary (1)
- Gift tax (1)
- Inheritance (1)
- Inter vivos trust (1)
- Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (1)
- Interspousal (1)
- Joint ownership (1)
- Judicial authority (1)
- Land transaction (1)
- Lease (1)
- Malat v. Riddell (1)
- Marriage (1)
- Mental incompetent (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Standing To Appeal Zoning Determinations: The "Aggrieved Person" Requirement, Alfred V. Boerner
Standing To Appeal Zoning Determinations: The "Aggrieved Person" Requirement, Alfred V. Boerner
Michigan Law Review
During the twentieth century the states have increasingly utilized their police power to control the use of land. All fifty states have now enacted zoning enabling legislation, much of which is based in whole or in part on the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act. Typically, these zoning acts, like the Standard Act, empower municipalities to promulgate land use regulations by dividing the municipality "into districts of such number, shape, and area as may be deemed best suited to carry out the purposes of this act ..." Most zoning acts specify that "all such regulations shall be uniform for each class …
Toward Uniform Guardianship Legislation, William F. Fratcher
Toward Uniform Guardianship Legislation, William F. Fratcher
Michigan Law Review
The Model Probate Code, part IV of which covers guardianship of the persons and property of infants and mental incompetents, was published in 1946 under the auspices of the University of Michigan Law School. It was prepared for the Probate Law Division of the Section of Real Property, Probate, and Trust Law of the American Bar Association by its Model Probate Code Committee in cooperation with the research staff of the Law School. No state has adopted the Model Probate Code in its entirety, but parts of it have been enacted in Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, …
Joint Tenancy: The Estate Lawyer's Continuing Burden, John E. Riecker
Joint Tenancy: The Estate Lawyer's Continuing Burden, John E. Riecker
Michigan Law Review
The discussion which follows will be divided into three major parts. First, it will be important to see why so much real and personal property remains in joint tenancy between husband and wife or in entireties tenancy. It has been almost eighteen years since Congress eliminated the necessity of holding property in this form in order to split income therefrom for income tax purposes. Is inertia the only reason for the popularity of joint ownership, or are there other reasons? Second, we shall review the familiar but false assumptions most laymen (and even a few attorneys) commonly make regarding the …
Notice And The "Deeds Out" Problem, William E. Ryckman Jr.
Notice And The "Deeds Out" Problem, William E. Ryckman Jr.
Michigan Law Review
When a grantor conveys land which has been subjected to easements or equitable servitudes in favor. of adjacent land previously conveyed by the grantor, there arises the serious question whether such interests are enforceable if the purchaser has not expressly taken the land subject to them. A cursory inspection of primary and secondary authority on the subject of easements and equitable servitudes would indicate that the answer depends upon whether, at the time of the sale, the purchaser of the "servient estate" has "notice" of the "burden" to which his land is allegedly subjected. It is the purpose of this …
Future Interests--Implying A Requirement Of Survival In Future Interests: Continued Confusion--Schau V. Cecil, Michigan Law Review
Future Interests--Implying A Requirement Of Survival In Future Interests: Continued Confusion--Schau V. Cecil, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Contingent future interests have caused considerable confusion in cases in which the holder of the future interest dies before the fulfillment of the condition. This confusion stems from a tendency by some courts to use the word "contingent" as a shorthand way of indicating that the interest holder must survive until a certain time or event. A future interest is correctly said to be "contingent" when it is subject to a condition, in addition to the termination of the prior estate, which must occur before the interest becomes a present estate. The two usages of the word are often overlapping, …
Income Tax-Deductions-Lessor's Amortization Of The Amount By Which The Purchase Price Of Improved Realty Exceeds The Appraised Value Of Land-Bender V.United States, Michigan Law Review
Income Tax-Deductions-Lessor's Amortization Of The Amount By Which The Purchase Price Of Improved Realty Exceeds The Appraised Value Of Land-Bender V.United States, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Taxpayer, upon being informed that his tenant would not renew his lease unless he could be assured of additional parking facilities, purchased three lots adjacent to the leasehold and immediately demolished the houses thereon in order to provide the necessary space. Since the owners of these residential properties knew of taxpayer's special need, taxpayer was forced to pay substantially more than the total appraised value of the land. In computing his income tax, taxpayer sought to amortize over the life of the lease the cost of razing the buildings and the amount of the purchase price in excess of the …
"Primarily For Sale" In I.R.C Sections 1221 And 1231 Held To Mean "Principally For Sale" Rather Than "Substantially For Sale" --Malat V. Riddell (U.S. 1966), Michigan Law Review
"Primarily For Sale" In I.R.C Sections 1221 And 1231 Held To Mean "Principally For Sale" Rather Than "Substantially For Sale" --Malat V. Riddell (U.S. 1966), Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Sections 1221 and 1231 of the Internal Revenue Code disqualify from capital gains treatment profits derived from the sale or exchange of property "held by the taxpayer primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of his trade or business." In deciding whether these sections deny capital gains treatment to profits realized by real estate dealers from the sale or exchange of land, the circuit courts, while examining similar facts in relation to the same criteria, have reached divergent conclusions. Two recent decisions, Municipal Bond Corp. v. Commissioner and Malat v. Riddell, illustrate these discordant results. In Municipal …