Dielman v. Reems
Citations
- 115 La. 102
- 38 So. 930
- 1905 La. LEXIS 626
Syllabus
<p>NUNCUPATIVE WILL — VALIDITY — PEESENTATION — ACKNOWLEDGMENT.</p> <p>1. A nuncupative will by private act is not invalid because written in the presence of the five attesting witnesses, without formal dictation. The cases of Prendergast v. Prendergast, 16 La. Ann. 219, 79 Am. Dec. 575, and Succession of Morales, 16 La. Ann. 267, reaffirmed.</p> <p>2. The “presentation” of such a will supplies or dispenses with dictation, and it need not be manual, but the acknowledgment of the testator that the paper contains his last will implies the presentation provided by law, even when that acknowledgment is in response to a question. Pfarr & Kullman v. Belmont, 1 South. 6S1, 39 La. Ann. 294, reaffirmed.</p> <p>Provosty and Monroe, JJ., dissenting.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding No Pay-No Play statute unconstitutional
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Land, Monboe, Pkovosty
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.