Succession of Brugier

83 So. 366, 146 La. 29, 1919 La. LEXIS 1840
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedNovember 3, 1919
DocketNo. 23008
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 83 So. 366 (Succession of Brugier) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Succession of Brugier, 83 So. 366, 146 La. 29, 1919 La. LEXIS 1840 (La. 1919).

Opinion

SOMMERYILDE, J.

The last will and testament of Marie Sophie Brugier, in olographic form written partly in ink and partly in pencil, was offered for probate, when certain relatives of the deceased, claiming to toe her legal heirs, opposed the admission of the will upon the ground that the deceased had been for a number of years previous to the date of the will, May, 1916, unable to attend to her own affairs and was irresponsible and of unsound mind; and on the further ground that the will was not written, dated, and signed by the deceased. In a supplemental petition, opponents alleged that—

“The said deceased was at the very time of writing said will totally unable, physically or mentally, and for many years previous thereto, continuously and uninterruptedly, mentally and physically incapacitated to understand and to know what she was doing, or writing in the confection of the said will now offered for probate; and that she was then and had been for many years previously thereto a true cretin, with total state of. physical and mental imbecility, making her totally unable to understand what she was doing, and particularly, totally unable to make a valid last will and testament.”

There was no testimony offered to prove that the deceased was a cretin. Cretinism is a malady which appears to be pretty well known in the Alps; but it is not known in this country. There was evidence offered, and it was shown, that the deceased was afflicted with myxoedema, a disease which produces a cretinoid appearance of the face, slow speech, and dullness of intellect, due to failure of the function of the thyroid gland. (Standard Dictionary.) The thyroid gland' appears also to be involved in cretinism, but they are not one and the same disease. Myx-cedema is a disease of comparatively recent origin, and great strides have been made by the medical profession in recent years in relieving the patient afflicted with it. And the testimony shows that under the care of Dr. E. J. Mioton, with the use of certain thyroid [31]*31tablets, made from tlie thyroid glands of sheep, Miss Brugier was very much improved, and was pronounced well by the physician; that is, in so far as a cure could be effected, by the continuous use of the thyroid tablets.

[1] Capacity to make a will is tested at the time of making same. Succ. McDermott, 136 La. 80, 66 South. 546; Succ. Schlumbretch, et ux., 138 La. 173, 70 South. 76.

[2] Miss Brugier was 40 years of age at the time of making her will, and she will be presumed to be mentally sound unless the contrary be shown.

[3] The will admitted to probate is a sensible one, written, dated, and signed by her; and that is the best answer to an allegation of absence of capacity. It was written on a form given to her some years previous to her death by her then counsel, Judge Charles F. Claiborne, now of the Court of Appeal. In the will, the deceased disposed of all of her property, giving it to her friends, servants, and charities in which she was interested.

Opponents offered in evidence certain interdiction proceedings, instituted by Mrs. Brugier, the mother of the deceased, in the year 1900, wherein there was judgment declaring Miss Brugier to be an interdict. The judgment was based on the expert reports of Drs. E. J. Mioton and Sidney J. ThSard, two reputable physicians of the city of New Orleans. They both declared, at that time, that Miss Brugier was not capable of attending to her own affairs. Within a year after the judgment was rendered, Miss Brugier, individually, went before the same learned judge and asked that the judgment of interdiction be removed on the ground that she had recovered her health, physically and mentally. The two experts who had been appointed previously were appointed again; and they both made reports to the effect that Miss Brugier had been entirely restored to health, and that she was at that time capable of attending to her own affairs, And the same judge, who had adjudged her an interdict in the year previous,’ removed the judgment of interdiction; and Miss Brugier was free from the effects of that judgment since the year 1901.

Dr. Mioton was called as a witness in this case by the opponents. He testified that he had begun treating Miss Brugier at the time of her interdiction with thyroid tablets, of a French make, and that she had used them very regularly. He further said that she had responded magnificently to the treatment, and that the continued use of the thyroid tablets for several years, while he was attending to her, caused her to improve steadily. He further stated that it was necessary that the use of the tablets should be continued until the end, as the discontinuance of such use would cause a relapse. The evidence is clear that Miss Brugier continued to use the tablets to within a few days of her death.

It appears that there is no such thing as a positive cure of the disease known at this time, as the thyroid gland cannot be replaced. The tablets merely acted as a substitute for the gland in controlling the nutrition of the body.

Dr. Mioton testified in part as follows:

“I was first called to this lady, probably, 25, 20 or 25, years ago. She was then under the treatment of Dr. Edmund Hincks, of Biloxi, I think. * * * At the time of the interdiction proceedings, she was absolutely in a helpless condition, not only physically, but mentally as well. She was practically an imbecile. * * * (I treated her) until four or five years before her death. I began the treatment as soon as I saw the patient, and the treatment was the extract of the thyroid gland. * * * It is a general remedy. * * * (She responded to the treatment) magnificently, splendidly; four or five months after she began (to use the remedy) she began to show signs of marked improvement, which gradually kept up until she was practically well. * * * The effect of the treatment is to supply the deficiency of the gland or any [33]*33atrophy of the thyroid gland with consequent lack of secretion of the gland.”

In answer to the question, “What would the lack of that nutrition to the whole system have upon persons from the age of 9 to the age of 25?” he answered:

‘Well, just as I have stated a while ago, an cedema of the whole body.
“Q. Does that deficiency arrest mental development? A. Tes, sir; mental and physical development, both.
“Q. A person suffering from that disease, do you know of any permanent cure? A. Tes, sir; I have a case on hand now, sir, where the lady is perfectly well. There is only one other way to cure that, and that is for the lady to keep up the treatment. The patient must keep up with taking of the extract of thyroid glands the balance of her days.
“Q. When she walked, did she walk like a normal person (after she had taken the tablets)? A. Well, at the time when she .was sick, she couldn’t; but when she was well she did, like any other person. I think I saw her about 8 or 10 days prior to her death. I am not absolutely certain about that; I would have to have my book to answer that positively. * * * She had been in the care of Dr. Laurans in my absence, and when I came back Dr. Laurans handed me back my patient. * * ■' She died, practically, of 'the same thing (myxcedema * * * ). No, sir; she was not cured, because to cure a patient like that you would have to put in a new gland.

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

Related

Succession of Reynaud
619 So. 2d 628 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1993)
Succession of Vicknair
126 So. 2d 680 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1961)
Succession of Patterson
22 So. 2d 214 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1945)
Landry v. Landry
199 So. 401 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1940)
Succession of Knight
151 So. 230 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1933)
Freed Realty Co. v. Singer
5 La. App. 551 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1927)
Succession of Rouquette
108 So. 319 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1926)
Succession of Ford
92 So. 61 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
83 So. 366, 146 La. 29, 1919 La. LEXIS 1840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/succession-of-brugier-la-1919.