Legal Opinion

Succession of Bisso

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided May 2, 1966No. 2103PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHASEZ, Judge.

This is an action to annul the probate of an olographic will and declare the instrument invalid on two grounds: (1) that the document was a forgery, and (2) that the testator lacked testamentary capacity by reason of insanity at the time of making the will.

The document under attack was written on January 20, 1959. It revokes all previous wills and leaves the testator’s estate to his two children, “share and share alike,” and names his daughter as testamentary executrix. It further appoints Harry Cabral, Jr. as attorney for the estate and the executrix.

The plaintiff testator’s…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Kingsbury v. WhitakerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1880
  2. Succession of MithoffSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1929
  3. McCarty v. TrichelSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1950
  4. Succession of LambertSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1936
  5. Chandler v. BarrettSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1869

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Succession of PattersonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1976
  2. Henry v. BlakesleyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1976
  3. Lejeune v. Succession of DuplechinLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1972
  4. Succession of BissoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API