Succession of Dialbano

524 So. 2d 13, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 779, 1988 WL 20731
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedMarch 10, 1988
DocketNo. CA 8181
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 524 So. 2d 13 (Succession of Dialbano) 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
Succession of Dialbano, 524 So. 2d 13, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 779, 1988 WL 20731 (La. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinions

CIACCIO, Judge.

Petitioners appeal a summary judgment dismissing their “Petition To Annul Probated Testament.” Petitioners argue that summary judgment was improper because there remains a genuine issue of material fact, viz., whether decedent was domiciled in Louisiana or Mississippi. We affirm, holding that decedent’s domicile is not a material fact, and that the judgment of the district court is correct as a matter of law.

Approximately two years before her death decedent came to New Orleans from her home in Mississippi to receive medical treatment. Because of her ill health she remained in New Orleans without re-toning home. On June 3,1986, she died at her residence in New Orleans.

On November 5, 1985, decedent had executed a will in proper statutory form under La.R.S. 9:2442. On February 16,1986, she had executed a will in the presence of two witnesses, a form not recognized in Louisiana, but alleged by petitioners to be valid in Mississippi. After her death the statutory will of November 5,1985, was presented to and probated by a Louisiana court; the will of February 16,1986, was presented to and probated by a Mississippi court.

In the succession proceedings in Louisiana petitioners filed a petition to annul the probated will of November 5, 1985. Petitioners argued that the February 16, 1986, will revoked the earlier statutory will, and relied on the Uniform Probate Law, La.R.S. 9:2421 et seq., in asserting the validity of the later will. Petitioners relied particularly upon La.R.S. 9:2423:

Sec. 2423. Admission to probate; force and effect

If upon the hearing, it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the will has been duly proved, allowed, and admitted to probate outside of this state, and that it was executed according to the law of the place in which the same was made, or in which the testator was at the time domiciled, or in conformity with the laws of this state, it must be admitted to probate, which probate shall have the same force and effect as the original probate of a domestic will, (emphasis supplied.)

Petitioners opposed the motion for summary judgment to dismiss the petition by arguing that the state of decedent’s domicile was an unresolved material fact. Petitioners argued that if when she executed the will decedent was domiciled in Mississippi and the will was valid under Mississippi law, then the will, having been probated by a Mississippi court, must be admitted to probate by the Louisiana court under La.R. S. 9:2423. The district court granted summary judgment dismissing the petition to annul.

To have effect in Louisiana, a will executed in Louisiana must conform to the formalities of Louisiana law on testaments. La.C.C. Arts. 1570 and 1595; La.C.C. Art. 15.

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

Related

Succession of Dialbano
530 So. 2d 554 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
524 So. 2d 13, 1988 La. App. LEXIS 779, 1988 WL 20731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/succession-of-dialbano-lactapp-1988.