Succession of May
Citations
- 109 La. 994
- 34 So. 52
- 1903 La. LEXIS 459
Syllabus
<p>WILL — CONSTRUCTION—PRAYER FOR NULLITY —DISPOSABLE PORTION.</p> <p>1. The testator provided in his will as follows: “Should my wife die, I want her portion to go to my daughter. Should my daughter die, I want her share to go to my wife.” If by this he meant that, in case one of his legatees died before he did, the other should take the entire estate, the will is irreproachable. If, on the contrary, he meant that at the death of the legatee first dying the other should take the estate, the will contains a prohibited substitution, and is null. The scale hanging even between these two interpretations, it is made to preponderate in favor of the validity of the will.</p> <p>2. Under a prayer for the nullity of the will on the ground that the disposable portion is exceeded, the court may decree a reduction to the disposable portion.</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.
- dismissing similar Washington law claims after concluding that Oregon law applied
- dismissing similar Washington law claims after concluding that Oregon law applied
- “Oregon courts do not consider extrinsic evidence when interpreting insurance policy language. To Oregon courts, the interpretation of an insurance policy is a ‘question of law that is confined to the four corners of the policy without regard to extrinsic evidence.””
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Provosty
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.