Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Houssiere, 174 So. 2d 521.

23 citing documents.

Succession of Larry David Massenburg . La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2026
Further, the trial court only has the power to remove a succession representative once “there is convincing evidence of an act or acts of mismanagement.” (1965).
Succession of John Kelley Martin La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
Succession of Charles B. Fanz, Jr. . La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
Further, the trial court only has the power to remove a succession representative once “there is convincing evidence of an act or acts of mismanagement.” (1965).
Succession of Fanz 208 So. 3d 422 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 4/25/01), , , (1965); (La.App.
Succession of Horrell 79 So. 3d 1162 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
5th Cir.1988) ( , (1965); (La.App.
In Re Succession of Brazan 975 So. 2d 53 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
Succession of Cucchero 845 So. 2d 450 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
2nd Cir.1984); , (1965).
Succession of McIntire 785 So. 2d 1032 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
In Re Succession of LaFleur 752 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
Succession of Orlando 531 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
an act or omission which redounds to the detriment of the estate.” (1st Cir.1984).
Succession of Krushevski 528 So. 2d 743 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
Baggette v. Collins 501 So. 2d 1017 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
As we noted by Justice Hawthorne in Footnote 1 in his dissent in , (1965), [174 So.2d] on page 527: “It is entirely natural for a succession representative to employ himself as counsel when he is also an attorney, but that practice has been thoroughly condemned in the strongest language by this court as a conflict of interest to the extent of allowing him no remunerat
Succession of Crain 450 So. 2d 1372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Succession of Mangle 452 So. 2d 197 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
In , (1965), the Supreme Court enunciated the character and standard of the fiduciary capacity: "We do not subscribe to the view ...
Sanders v. Rhodes 452 So. 2d 197 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
In , (1965), the Supreme Court enunciated the character and standard of the fiduciary capacity: “We do not subscribe to the view ...
Succession of Pyle 434 So. 2d 523 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
3d Cir.1962), affirmed , (1965); (La.App.
Succession of Skye 417 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1982
As was noted by Justice Hawthorne in Footnote 1 in his dissent in , (1965), on page 527: "It is entirely natural for a succession representative to employ himself as counsel when he is also an attorney, but that practice has been thoroughly condemned in the strongest language by this court as a conflict of interest to the extent of allowing him no remuneration for such
Succession of Demarest 418 So. 2d 1368 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
The Supreme Court in , (1965), stated: "We do not subscribe to the view ...
Matter of Succession of Dunham 393 So. 2d 438 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
of Houssiere, , (1965), which it stated held (1) that the succession representative should not be removed for anticipated mismanagement, and (2) that the wishes of the decedent should be respected in maintaining the appointment of a succession representative.
Succession of Celestin 393 So. 2d 268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
See also, Succession of Kaffie, supra; , (1965).
Succession of Benton 354 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
490 (1872); and a dissent in , (1965).
Rosenthal v. Frederick 273 So. 2d 318 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
784 (1876), and , (1965).
Smith v. Smith 219 So. 2d 291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969