Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Durham v. Williams, 32 La. Ann. 162.

10 citing documents.

Slaton v. King 30 So. 2d 867 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1947
Ann. 618 ; ; Succession of Merrick, 35 La.
Succession of Franklin 127 So. 767 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1930
862 , the court held: “A surviving widow, who opens the bank box of the deceased and converts its contents to her own use, without notice to some of the forced heirs, and without an order of court and inventory, as required by law, places herself in the_ position of a ‘spoliator,’ and as such will be held to a strict accounting.” In the case of Durham vs. William, , it was said: *291 “The wife’s interest in the community is residuary — one half of what remains after its debts are paid.” See, als
Succession of Crouch 8 La. App. 86 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1927
The administration properly conducted included the community property (Durham vs. Williams, ; Oriol vs. Herndon, 38 La.
Kittredge v. Grau 103 So. 723 La. 1925
Ann. 618 ; ; Succession of Merrick, 35 La.
Succession of Goll 101 So. 263 La. 1924
Ann. 618 ; ; Succession of Merrick, 35 La.
Kelly v. Kelly 60 So. 671 La. 1912
Durham v. Williams, Tutrix, et al., .
McWilliams v. Stair 55 So. 343 La. 1911
See, also, ; Moore v. Stancel, 36 La.
Luria v. Cote Blanche Co. 38 So. 279 La. 1905
Counsel for plaintiffs admits in his brief that it is the settled jurisprudence of this court that executory proceedings against the surviving husband alone, and a judicial sale thereunder, convey a valid title to the purchaser; ; Succession of Cason, 32 La.
Thompson v. Vance 34 So. 112 La. 1903
Ann. 493 ; ; Tugwell v. Tugwell, 32 La.
Sharp v. Zeller 34 So. 129 La. 1902
Ann. 588 ; ; and Moore v. Stancel, 36 La.