Joseph McKenna

“ They were also parties to a trust deed made by her during her lifetime. They sued defendant in error Wardell, he then being United States Collector of Internal Revenue for the First District of California, to recover the sum of $4,545.50; that being the amount of a tax assessed against the estate of Henriette S. Lachman, upon the value of 4,895 shares of stock transferred in trust by Henriette S. Lachman to trustees, upon the assumption that the Act of Congress of September 8, 1916, was applicable to the trust. ”

“ Union Trust Company of San Francisco v. Wardell
Argued: April 17 and 18, 1922. --- Decided: May 1, 1922
This case was argued at the same time and submitted with No. 200, Shwab v. Doyle, 258 U.S. 529, 42 Sup. Ct. 391, 66 L. Ed. --, just decided. It involves, as that case did, the Estate Tax Act of September 8, 1916 (Comp. St. §§ 6336 1/2 a-6336 1/2 m) , and its different facts illustrate and aid the principle upon which that case was decided.
Plaintiffs in error are executors of the last will and testament of Henriette S. Lachman, deceased. ”

“ In this case the act is given operation against an instrument executed 15 years before the passage of the act.
The record exhibits proceedings that should be noticed. The demurrer of Wardell was sustained to the complaint, and a judgment of dismissal entered January 13, 1921.
On February 2, 1921, plaintiffs gave notice of a motion to substitute John S. Flynn as defendant in the place and stead of Wardell in so far as the action was against Wardell in his official capacity, and to permit it to be continued and prosecuted against him so far as it was against him personally. ”