Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Simms, 195 So. 2d 114.

22 citing documents.

Dela Vergne v. Dela Vergne, III 745 So. 2d 1271 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
Succession of Goode 395 So. 2d 875 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
This second vesting of title has been referred to as the “hallmark of the prohibited substitution.” , (1966).
Hawthorne Oil & Gas Corp. v. Continental Oil Co. 368 So. 2d 726 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
In perhaps one of the best analyses of the application of this article, the Fourth Circuit, in reversed on other grounds, , , held that rights are to be classified according to their object.
Succession of Gwathmey 364 So. 2d 226 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
And in , (1966), it was stated: "It is obvious, .
Taylor v. Baten 364 So. 2d 226 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
If permitted, the effect of the substitution would be to tie up the title and keep it out of commerce during the lifetime of the first donee, during which time neither he nor the person designated to receive the title at the do-nee’s death could alienate it.” And in So.2d 114, 132 (1966), it was stated: “It is obvious, .
Succession of Burgess 359 So. 2d 1006 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
In the Crichton case the court relied on , (1967) in stating: "It is obvious, therefore, that a prohibited substitution exists when a testator places the title of the property bequeathed in a first named legatee (referred to as the instituted heir) at his death, and directs that, at the end of a specified period, usually but not necessarily at
Succession of Goss 304 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
4th Cir. 1965), affirmed , ; (La.App.
Succession of Stewart 301 So. 2d 872 La. 1974
[4] , (1966), certiorari denied 389 U.S. 850 , 88 S.Ct.
McLendon v. First National Bank of Shreveport 299 So. 2d 407 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1974
Succession of Stewart 287 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Typical is the language used in , (1965), a case concerning the will of a decedent who died in 1959.
Wurzlow v. Placid Oil Company 279 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
"On the question of whether the action here asserted is a real or a personal action the Court reaffirms the holding *769 made in its judgment of April 3, 1967, overruling defendant's exception of venue, in which the Court found, based on Succession of Simms [ ], [1966], and La.R.S.
Succession of Dinwiddie 263 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1972
See: , (1965); Succession of Reilly, supra; Succession of Rougon, 223 La.
Succession of Walters 259 So. 2d 12 La. 1972
1058 , (1953); , (1967); and Crichton v. Succession of Gredler, 256 La.
Succession of Thomas 243 So. 2d 324 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
1058 , ; , *326 , and Crichton v. Succession of Gredler, 256 La.
Crichton v. Succession of Gredler 235 So. 2d 411 La. 1970
Steinau v. Pyburn 229 So. 2d 153 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
9:1105, Code of Civil Procedure Article 3664, and the Succession of Simms, La.App., , affirmed in , (1965).
Crichton v. Succession of Gredler 220 So. 2d 714 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
St. Charles Land Trust, Achille Guibet v. St. Amant 217 So. 2d 385 La. 1968
MIDDLE TENNESSEE COUNCIL, INC. BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA v. Ford 205 So. 2d 867 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
In affirming this decision, the Supreme Court, in , , said: "In a well considered opinion the trial judge correctly disposed of all of these exceptions, holding: (1) The court had jurisdiction rationae personae as the succession proceeding did not terminate with the rendition of the judgment of possession, numerous steps having to be taken thereafter by
Succession of King 201 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1967
Succession of Thomas 202 So. 2d 410 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1967
This was one of the holdings of the Court in affirmed by the Supreme Court at (1966).
Whitehall Oil Company v. Heard 197 So. 2d 672 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
See: Yiannopoulos, Id.; Daggett, Id.; Succession of Simms, La., (decided November 7, 1966); Crown Central Petroleum Corp. v. Barousse, 238 La.