Succession of Munch
This text of 118 So. 688 (Succession of Munch) 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.
Opinion
The deceased left an estate of $250,000. Drs. Harrison & Phillips attended him, in his last illness, visiting him once or oftener a day for some 30 odd days before his death, and performing two major operations *49 (blood transfusions) upon him, one about three weeks before his death and the other a few days before.
The executor placed them upon the account for $1,000; they opposed the account, and asked for an increase to $2,500, which the trial judge allowed. The testamentary executor of the widow in community (who had died pending the settlement of the succession) and the residuary legatee of the deceased have appealed.
The only evidence in the record touching the value of the services rendered is that of the two physicians, to the effect that their charge is reasonable and fair, considering the services rendered, and the standing and means of the deceased; that is, the usual charge in such cases.
The testimony of the opponents being uncontradicted and not inherently lacking in credibility, and their character and standing in the profession being unquestioned, we cannot see wherein the trial judge erred in accepting it as the measure of values for .their services.
Decree.
The judgment appealed from is therefore affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
118 So. 688, 167 La. 48, 1928 La. LEXIS 2005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/succession-of-munch-la-1928.