This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Probate and Trusts
Limited Partnership
Right to Liquidate

Estate of Morton B. Harper, deceased, Michael A. Harper, Executor v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Published: Aug. 19, 2000 | Result Date: Jun. 30, 2000 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1933698 Verdict –  $0

Judge

Thomas B. Wells

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Warren J. Kessler

Joan B. Kessler
(JAMS)


Defendant

Steven E.M. Roth

Donna F. Herbert


Facts

On Dec. 18, 1990, Morton Harper created a revocable inter vivos trust. The trust named Morton Harper as trustee and designated his children, Michael and Lynn as successor trustees. The assets held by the trust consisted of marketable securities and mutual funds, plus a note receivable for $450,000. On Jan. 1, 1994 Michael and Lynn entered into an agreement that created a California limited partnership. Michael and Lynn became general partners with interests of .4 and .16 percent respectively, and the trust became the sole limited partner eith an interest of 99 percent. On July 1, 1994, the parties entered into an amendment to the partnership agreement that created two classes of limited partnership interest. On Feb. 1, 1995, Morton Harper died. On the Federal Estate Tax return filed, Morton Harper's estate reported a 39 percent Class A limited partnership interest in the partnership with a value of $410,100, after a 35 percent discount.

Result

The court ordered that the limitations on liquidation contained in the partnership agreement were not applicable restrictions within the meaning of Section 2704(b) and, must be taken int account in valuing the limited partnership interests at issue. The respondent's motion for partial summary judgment was denied.

Other Information

<P>The respondent's motion for partial summary judgment was denied.</P>


#97205

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390