Legal Opinion
In Re Succession of Carroll
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Decided December 8, 2009No. 09-CA-219PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MARION F. EDWARDS, Judge.
laThis issue presented to us in this succession proceeding is whether a handwritten document signed and dated by the decedent is a valid olographic codicil to the decedent’s will. This matter has been before this Court in a prior appeal 1 (Carroll I). In Can-oil I, this Court examined a different writing by the decedent and agreed with the trial court that the document did not constitute a valid olographic testament. We find now, as we did in Carroll I, that the document at issue herein is not a valid olographic testament.
FACTS
Kenneth Eugene Carroll (“Mr. Carroll” or…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Stobart v. State Through DOTDSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
- Canovsky v. GehrsenLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1927
- Borden-Aicklen Auto Supply Co. v. Folse Service StationLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1927
- Hendry v. Succession of HelmsLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1990
- In Re Succession of RhodesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2005
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Succession of CannonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2015
- In re Succession of BoadaLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2013
- Succession of Linda F. EnosLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2020