|
Posted by Stuart Bronstein on June 19, 2008, 2:08 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>> The case I could come up with on quick research for the
>> California rule is exemplified in Board of Regents v. Davis, 74
>> Cal.App.3d 862 (1977),
>
> In that case there was a quid pro quo, naming of a football
> stadium. Also, it was an action against the estate of the person
> who had made the pledge before kicking the bucket. The case seems
> to have revolved around whether the decedent was competent to have
> made the pledge. IOW, the heirs were trying to defeat the intent
> of the decedent and failed.
>
> I'm not persuaded that a California resident after having made a
> promise of a gift could not successfully renege on that promise.
I'd always heard that was the rule, but never had the need to research
it. After looking into it more, it turns out you're right. The courts
are pretty quick to find consideration when it comes to charities,
however. If a pledge is made knowing others are being asked to
contribute to the same purpose, the court hold that, sort of like third
party beneficiaries, a pledge becomes enforceable for that reason
alone.
Stu
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Gil Faver on June 19, 2008, 4:54 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>> The case I could come up with on quick research for the California rule
>> is exemplified in Board of Regents v. Davis, 74 Cal.App.3d 862 (1977),
>
> In that case there was a quid pro quo, naming of a football stadium.
> Also, it was an action against the estate of the person who had made
> the pledge before kicking the bucket. The case seems to have revolved
> around whether the decedent was competent to have made the pledge.
> IOW, the heirs were trying to defeat the intent of the decedent and
> failed.
>
> I'm not persuaded that a California resident after having made a
> promise of a gift could not successfully renege on that promise.
Stuart is right. We learned it in law school, and I am not going to do your
legal research for you.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Gil Faver on June 20, 2008, 12:40 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>
>>> The case I could come up with on quick research for the California rule
>>> is exemplified in Board of Regents v. Davis, 74 Cal.App.3d 862 (1977),
>>
>> In that case there was a quid pro quo, naming of a football stadium.
>> Also, it was an action against the estate of the person who had made
>> the pledge before kicking the bucket. The case seems to have revolved
>> around whether the decedent was competent to have made the pledge.
>> IOW, the heirs were trying to defeat the intent of the decedent and
>> failed.
>>
>> I'm not persuaded that a California resident after having made a
>> promise of a gift could not successfully renege on that promise.
>
>
> Stuart is right. We learned it in law school, and I am not going to do
> your legal research for you.
as always, it is more complicated that a simple yes or no.
http://www.msk.com/csl_files/325308.pdf
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Stuart Bronstein on June 20, 2008, 12:55 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>>> I'm not persuaded that a California resident after having made a
>>> promise of a gift could not successfully renege on that promise.
>>
>>
>> Stuart is right. We learned it in law school, and I am not going
>> to do your legal research for you.
>
> as always, it is more complicated that a simple yes or no.
>
> http://www.msk.com/csl_files/325308.pdf
Thanks, that's so interesting!
Stu
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
|
Posted by Bill Brown on June 21, 2008, 12:24 am
Please log in for more thread options >
>
> >> The case I could come up with on quick research for the California rule
> >> is exemplified in Board of Regents v. Davis, 74 Cal.App.3d 862 (1977),
>
> > In that case there was a quid pro quo, naming of a football stadium.
> > Also, it was an action against the estate of the person who had made
> > the pledge before kicking the bucket. The case seems to have revolved
> > around whether the decedent was competent to have made the pledge.
> > IOW, the heirs were trying to defeat the intent of the decedent and
> > failed.
>
> > I'm not persuaded that a California resident after having made a
> > promise of a gift could not successfully renege on that promise.
>
> Stuart is right. We learned it in law school, and I am not going to do your
> legal research for you.
<<Shrug>> I just love those "I know something you don't know" answers.
Well, I learned just the opposite in my undergraduate commercial law
class -- something about consideration in the chapter on contracts.
I haven't heard anything about William & Mary going to court to get
the money pledged by people who reneged over the cross in Wren Chapel
dust up. There were significant dollars involved (7+ figures to the
left of the decimal point) unlike the next example.
And, VCU didn't come after me when I changed employers and thus
stopped having amounts pledged to them withheld from my paycheck.
But maybe Virginia law is different or maybe Virginia institutions
have better sense than to try to enforce unfulfilled monetary pledges.
--
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
<< The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, >>
<< nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties >>
<< that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. >>
<< >>
<< The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts >>
<< to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy >>
<< are at www.asktax.org. >>
<< Copyright (2007) - All rights reserved. >>
<< ------------------------------------------------------- >>
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | How to tax a nonprofit? | July 16, 2008, 5:12 pm |
| Nonprofit not llisted in publication 78 | June 29, 2006, 12:35 am |
| Nonprofit Unincorporated Association Volunteer Fire Department | October 9, 2008, 3:22 pm |
| Unpaid Overtime | March 17, 2008, 9:59 pm |
| 1099Q, does it show up on my return? | February 14, 2008, 11:07 am |
| Where on 1120 does prev year refund show | October 11, 2007, 10:20 pm |
| TaxAct Online doesn't show saved return unless you start over | April 11, 2006, 3:50 am |
| Assets Deductible? | February 12, 2007, 12:04 am |
| Transfering Assets | January 4, 2008, 3:02 pm |
| Re: Basis Stepup on Trust Assets | August 16, 2006, 4:50 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap