Succession of Müh
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from tlie Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Tissot, J. 1. Erasures not approved by the testator are considered as not made. C. 0.1589. 2. Testaments can bo revoked only in one of tho forms prescribed by law for testaments. 0. 0.1691,1692. 3. The word erasures in Article 1589 applies to the whole will.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from tlie Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Tissot, J. 1. Erasures not approved by the testator are considered as not made. C. 0.1589. 2. Testaments can bo revoked only in one of tho forms prescribed by law for testaments. 0. 0.1691,1692. 3. The word erasures in Article 1589 applies to the whole will. The signature is not excepted, because it is one of the constitutive parts of the will. 4. The intention of a testator, however clearly expressed, will not he considered, if not clothed with the formalities required by law. 21 An. 450. 5. Parol evidence is not admissible to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Manning, J.
Ou May 4,1875, Louis Miih made bis olographic will in due form, and died November 13, 1882. A notary placed seals upon his effects on the day of his death, and put a guardian over them. A few days after, this officer in the presence of witnesses removed the seals, and made search for a will, A bureau, secretary, and some trunks were searched without success. A table stood in the bedchamber of the deceased, the drawer of which was looked. This drawer bad also been sealed by the notary. The key broke in the effort to unlock it, and it was…
2Cited by15 opinions
- In Re Succession of NunleySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1953
- Succession of TalbotSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1988
- Succession of ButterworthSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1940
- Succession of GuiraudSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1927
- Porch v. FarmerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.