In the United States Supreme Court case of United California Bank et al., Co-Executors v. United States, 1978, the court had to determine whether a charitable deduction should be allowed for estate tax purposes when it was uncertain at the time of death that any part of an estate would go to charity due to pending litigation. The decedent left his entire residuary estate in trust with instructions that upon termination, all remaining assets were to be distributed among several charities. However, at his death there were two lawsuits pending against him which could have consumed his entire net worth if decided unfavorably. The IRS denied a charitable deduction on grounds that it was not certain at the time of death whether any funds would remain for distribution to charity after resolution of these claims. On appeal by co-executors from lower courts' rulings favoring IRS's position, the Supreme Court held that uncertainty as to amount or fact does not necessarily preclude allowance of a charitable contribution provided there is certainty as regards purpose and object; hence reversed and remanded.

In the dissenting opinion for United California Bank et al., Co-Executors v. United States, Justice Blackmun argued that the majority's interpretation of Section 2038 of the Internal Revenue Code was incorrect and overly broad. He contended that this section should only apply to situations where a decedent had retained some level of control over transferred property at their time of death, not when they had relinquished all control during their lifetime as in this case. He believed that by applying Section 2038 to such cases, it would create an unnecessary overlap with other sections like 2036 and 2041 which already cover similar scenarios. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view on what constitutes "control" under Section 2038; arguing instead for a narrower definition based on actual power or influence over property rather than mere potential or theoretical ability to affect its disposition.