DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Succession of Smart, 36 So. 2d 639.

21 citing documents.

  • Succession of Laurie Maria Brocato La. 2026
    Reviewing the 2021 testament, we note that the first page of the testament starts with the date, January 31st 2021; identifies the testator by full name and date 3 36 So.
  • Succession of Laurie Maria Brocato . La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
    .” Caillouet, 05-0957, p. 4, 935 So.2d at 715 ( (La.
  • Succession of Marian Ethel Plant Petry La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2024
  • Succession of Caillouet 935 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    The court found that the decedent’s testamentary intent was clear due the inclusion of the language, “I, Anna Rita Babin King Caillouet, hereby make this my last will *715 and testament, revoking all prior wills that I may have made.” The trial court also cited the Louisiana Supreme Court case of , (1948), which held that an olographic will does not need to be written entirely on the same date.
  • In Re Succession of Plummer 847 So. 2d 185 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    The courts, over the years, have lessened the formalities of olographic wills, i.e., using slash dates instead of writing out the date, writing the will in part pencil, part ink, , (1948); and, (La.App.
  • Estate of Doucet v. Doucet 643 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
  • Succession of King 595 So. 2d 805 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
  • Succession of Merritt 581 So. 2d 728 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    The trial court relied on , (1948) and concluded that the bequest to Mr. Lawrence contained a prohibited substitution.
  • Succession of Hurst v. Gremillion 552 So. 2d 799 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • Succession of Angele 546 So. 2d 262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    1975); writing the will in part pencil, part ink, , (1948); (La.App.
  • Succession of Brice 390 So. 2d 905 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1980
    Art. 1715; , ; Succession of Montegut, 211 La.
  • Matter of Succession of Jones 369 So. 2d 1143 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
    1037 , (1966); , (1948).
  • Succession of Stewart 301 So. 2d 872 La. 1974
    (1948) and Succession of Montegut, 211 La.
  • Succession of Stewart 287 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
    Art. 1715; , ; Succession of Montegut, 211 La.
  • Campbell v. Pickering 271 So. 2d 338 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
    Art. 1715; , ; Succession of Montegut, 211 La.
  • Succession of Walters 259 So. 2d 12 La. 1972
    908 (1920); and , (1948).
  • Succession of Thomas 243 So. 2d 324 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
    Succession of Hunter, 159 La.
  • Giroir v. Dumesnil 184 So. 2d 1 La. 1966
    Art. 1715; , ; Succession of Montegut, 211 La.
  • Giroir v. Dumesnil 172 So. 2d 89 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1965
  • Oroszy v. Burkard 158 So. 2d 405 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
  • Succession of Reynolds 71 So. 2d 537 La. 1954
    As stated in , , “It is well settled that the invalidity of a portion of a will does not destroy the will in its entirety.” Plaintiffs’ counsel further suggest in their brief that after the death of the testatrix there was an interchange or shuffling of pages as between the probated will, on the one hand, and the