Legal Opinion

Succession of Virgadamo

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided December 16, 1992No. 92-CA-297PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

KLIEBERT, Chief Judge.

This is an appeal from a trial court judgment dated July 11, 1991 by James Kam-bur, defendant in rule and the attorney named by the decedent, Arthur Virgadamo, in his probated testament to represent the testamentary executrix i.e., Sandra Clayton Smith Virgadamo, the decedent’s fourth wife. For the reasons hereafter stated we set aside the ruling and remand the succession proceedings to the trial court.

A review of the record before us shows the administration of the succession was fraught with friction from its inception in 1985. Prior to the commencement of the dispute…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Krueger v. TaborLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1989
  2. Louisiana Materials Co. v. CronvichLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1970
  3. Succession of GriffithLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1982

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Kambur v. MattoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API