In Re Succession of Forman

37 So. 3d 1081, 9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1455, 2010 La. App. LEXIS 642, 2010 WL 1780087
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedMay 5, 2010
DocketCA 09-1455
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 37 So. 3d 1081 (In Re Succession of Forman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Succession of Forman, 37 So. 3d 1081, 9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1455, 2010 La. App. LEXIS 642, 2010 WL 1780087 (La. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

EZELL, Judge.

| j Sisters, Phoebe Forman Vicknair and Cynthia Forman, appeal a trial court judgment finding that they were not forced heirs of their mother. The trial court found that neither Phoebe nor Cynthia were permanently incapable of taking care of their person or administering their estate pursuant to La.Civ.Code art. 1493.

FACTS

Patricia Lee Forman died on August 29, 2008. She and her deceased husband, Charles Forman, had three children: Phoebe Forman Vicknair, born on July 8, 1956; Cynthia Forman, born on August 24, 1957; and Charles Forman, born on January 12, 1964.

On August 7, 2007, Patricia Forman executed a last will and testament. Pursuant to the will, Patricia left the family home and all immovable property that she possessed at the time of her death to her sister Bobbie Bushnell. The three children filed a petition, contesting the validity of the testament. In a later petition, the children specifically sought a reduction of an excess legacy because they claimed that the bequest to Bobbie impinged on their portions as forced heirs. Specifically, Phoebe and Cynthia claim that they suffer from mental illness, including bipolar disorder, which renders them incapable of caring for themselves. Charles did not raise any issue as to his status as a forced heir.

A bench trial was held on July 28, 2009. After taking the matter under advisement, the trial court issued written reasons for ruling. The trial court found that, although both Phoebe and Cynthia suffered from an incurable mental illness, the illness did not render them incapable of taking care of themselves or administering their estates. The trial court found that both women were capable of taking care of daily tasks and their households. Therefore, Phoebe and Cynthia were not forced heirs pursuant to Article 1493. The trial court found that Bobbie was entitled to the *1083 legacy bequeathed to her and reduction was not required since there were no forced heirs.

FORCED HEIRSHIP

Relying on La.Civ.Code art. 1493, Phoebe and Cynthia claim the trial court erred in failing to find that they are forced heirs. They argue that the medical evidence clearly establishes that they have inherited, incurable diseases which, even if not disabling now, “may” render them incapable of caring for their persons or estates in the future.

A trial court’s consideration of the factual circumstances surrounding the circumstances and severity of a potential forced heir’s capacity to care for herself or administer her estate is subject to the manifest error/clearly wrong standard of review. Stewart v. Estate of Stewart, 07-333 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/07), 966 So.2d 1241.

Article 1493 (emphasis supplied) provides, in pertinent part:

A. Forced heirs are descendants of the first degree who, at the time of the death of the decedent, are twenty-three years of age or younger or descendants of the first degree of any age who, because of mental incapacity or physical infirmity, are permanently incapable of taking care of their persons or administering their estates at the time of the death of the decedent.
[[Image here]]
E. For purposes of this Article “permanently incapable of taking care of their persons or administering their estates at the time of the death of the decedent” shall include descendants who, at the time of death of the decedent, have, according to medical documentation, an inherited, incurable disease or condition 'that may render them incapable of caring for their persons or administering their estates in the future.

At the trial, Phoebe and Cynthia both testified about the mental difficulties they have experienced in their lives. Phoebe testified that she has been under treatment since 2004 with Dr. Zahid Imran for anxiety, panic disorder, and depression. She is taking numerous medications for her problems. In November 2006, the Social Security Administration classified her as fully disabled, and she is now receiving disability benefits. Phoebe had a consistent job history since 1988, with one job as an auditor at BlueCross BlueShield of Louisiana for about fifteen years. However, in 2003 she found out she has Hepatitis C and started sleeping on the job a lot, so she lost her job. She has not worked since. Phoebe has been married for twenty-eight years and testified that her husband is the one who handles her affairs for her. They have no children.

Cynthia is not currently married and has three adult children. In 1979, she was diagnosed with schizophrenia and had multiple admissions to different facilities due to the disorder. She alternated admissions during this time between East Louisiana State Hospital and Greenwell Springs Hospital.

In the 1990s, she was treated for major depression with psychosis through Capital Area Human Services in Baton Rouge. During this time, she was also evaluated by Louisiana Rehabilitation Services. At that time, her psychiatric history was noted as significant for the presence of bipolar disorder as well as drug and alcohol dependence which was in remission. It was recommended that she continue psychiatric treatment for her bipolar disorder.

For the past several years, Cynthia has been treated for depression by Dr. Neha Shah through the Ochsner Clinic Foundation. During all of Cynthia’s treatments at the various facilities, it was observed that *1084 her psychotic condition was controlled with medication. Cynthia testified that, although she had been gainfully employed for the past five years, she had been asked to resign from several of her jobs. She explained that she distrusts people.

Dr. Catherine McDonald, an expert in the field of psychiatry, testified on behalf of both Phoebe and Cynthia. She reviewed both ladies’ medical records and evaluated each one on April 20, 2009. Dr. McDonald concluded that both ladies are incapable or may become incapable of caring for their own affairs without assistance. She diagnosed both with bipolar disorder, a condition they had when their mother died. Dr. McDonald based her diagnosis on the ladies’ medical records. Dr. McDonald explained that bipolar disorder is an illness that includes manic episodes and depressive episodes at different points in time. She further testified that bipolar disorder does interfere with life and employment functions. Although people with bipolar disorders can sometimes function, they can get worse. Dr. McDonald explained that mood psychiatric disorders run in families and they are not curable, only treatable.

In Succession of Ardoin, 07-43 (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/30/07), 957 So.2d 937, writ denied, 07-1332 (La.9/28/07), 964 So.2d 360, this court performed a de novo review of the trial court’s decision that a daughter who suffered from bipolar disorder was not a forced heir. We found that the trial court had applied the wrong standard in evaluating the case because La.Civ.Code art. 1493

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Succession of Vernon James Goudeau
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2026
Succession of Gabria Pepper Wilkins
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2020
In re Heyd
261 So. 3d 74 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018)
Succession of Lawrence Heyd
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 So. 3d 1081, 9 La.App. 3 Cir. 1455, 2010 La. App. LEXIS 642, 2010 WL 1780087, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-succession-of-forman-lactapp-2010.