Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Jordan v. Filmore, 120 So. 275.

24 citing documents.

In re the Succession of Odum 760 So. 2d 435 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
In Re Succession of Boyter 756 So. 2d 1122 La. 2000
Overruled Succession of Hackney 707 So. 2d 1302 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
Succession of Doll v. Doll 593 So. 2d 1239 La. 1992
Succession of Doll v. Doll 577 So. 2d 802 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
King v. Succession of Lowderback 567 So. 2d 716 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
Succession of Fakier 541 So. 2d 1372 La. 1988
Succession of Degelos 446 So. 2d 412 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Succession of Hendrick 430 So. 2d 734 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
Succession of Marcel 421 So. 2d 411 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
Ellis v. Benedict 408 So. 2d 987 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1981
In Succession of Simms 371 So. 2d 272 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1979
In Matter of Kendrick 361 So. 2d 309 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
Appellant's argument is first, that the trial judge erred in finding that this was a partition by an ascendant among his descendants and not subject to collation; second, the will exhibits the testator's intent to treat his sons equally; third, , 120 So.
Succession of Higgins 275 So. 2d 447 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1973
Successions of Webre 164 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
Successions of McLellan 159 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
In Re Andrus 60 So. 2d 899 La. 1952
Roach v. Roach 35 So. 2d 597 La. 1948
In support of these principles of law the judge cites Article 1502 of the Civil Code, , 120 So.
Himel v. Connely 197 So. 424 La. 1940
There is a marked distinction between a suit to reduce an excessive donation to the disposable portion and a suit for collation— , 120 So.
Succession of Smith 162 So. 21 La. 1935
“In Jordan v. Filmore et al., No. 27990 of our docket, , 120 So.
Succession of Harris 155 So. 446 La. 1934
Winbarg v. Winbarg 150 So. 21 La. 1933
Succession of Levy 134 So. 906 La. 1931
Walet v. Darby 120 So. 869 La. 1929
In Jordan v. Filmore et al., No. 27990 of our docket, ante, p. 725, , we held that the only right of a forced heir, who had by the will been deprived of all share in the estate, was to claim from the other heirs his legitime.