Legal Opinion
Succession of Mulqueeny
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Decided December 13, 1965No. 47709, 47710Published
1DissentMcCALEB, Justice
I agree with the views of the Court of Appeal (see Succession of Mulqueeny, 172 So.2d 326.) In Succession of Price, 202 La. 842, 13 So.2d 240, the Court said:
“The true rule in the interpretation of testaments is that ‘the intention of the testator must principally be endeavored to be ascertained, without departing, however, from the proper signification of the terms of the testament.’ Civil Code, Article 1712; Succession of McBurney, 165 La. 357, 115 So. 618; De *673laureal v. Roguet’s Succession, 177 La. 815, 149 So. 464. And, to ascertain that intention, the language of the will is generally to…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Succession of PriceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1943
- Presbyterian Hospital v. BaconSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1928
- Delaureal v. Roguet's SuccessionSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1933
- Succession of MulqueenyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1965
- Hasley v. HasleySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1873
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.