In exchange, Boyce promised to make a codicil to her will giving Wolder stock or securities from her estate.

Wolder provided legal services without billing Boyce and she revised her will, bequeathing to him $15,845 and 750 shares of stock.

In support of his argument Wolder cited United States v. Merriam, 263 U.S. 179 (1923)[4] which allowed recipients under a will to exclude bequests received "in lieu of all compensation or commissions to which they would otherwise be entitled as executors or trustees" from their income.

The court looked past the label Wolder and Boyce attached to their transfer finding that their intent was to provide compensation for services in the form of a bequest.

Wolder and Boyce entered into and satisfied the obligations of a contract for services providing for a "postponed payment" in the form of a bequest.