Succession of Aycock, 819 So. 2d 290 (La. 2002). · Go Syfert
Search
Succession of Aycock, 819 So. 2d 290 (La. 2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases, 2016–2019 · …mandamus is an extraordinary remedy which should be applied only where ordinary means fail to afford adequate relief. ⚠ not in text
17 citation events (17 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Hatcher v. Rouse (lactapp, 2017-02-01)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hatcher v. Rouse
La. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
C.C.P. art. 3862; Board of Trustees of Sheriff’s Pension and Relief Fund v. City of New Orleans, 02-0640 (La. 5/24/02), 819 So.2d 290, 291 (“mandamus is an extraordinary remedy which should be applied only where ordinary means fail to afford adequate relief’).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Aberta, Inc. v. Atkins
La. · 2012 · confidence medium
C.C.P. art. 3862; Board of Trustees of Sheriff’s Pension and Relief Fund v. City of New Orleans, 02-0640 (La.5/24/02), 819 So.2d 290, 291 (“mandamus is an extraordinary remedy which should be applied only where ordinary means fail to afford adequate relief’).
cited Cited "see" Lott v. Mahalia Jackson Residual Family Corp. XYZ Shareholders & XYZ Directors
La. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Succession of Aycock, 02-0701 (La.05/24/02), 819 So.2d 290 .
cited Cited "see" In Re Succession of Plummer
La. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See, In re Succession of Aycock, supra .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
SUCCESSION OF Mary L. AYCOCK
No. 2002-C-0701.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
May 24, 2002.
819 So. 2d 290
2002 La. LEXIS 1826
2002 WL 1048984
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Granted. For an olographic will to be valid, the testament must be written, signed and dated in the handwriting of the testator. La. Civ.Code art. 1575 (formerly La. Civ.Code art. 1588). In this case, the notary filled in the date on the testament. While extrinsic evidence may be allowable in some circumstances to clarify an ambiguity, when the testament contains no date at all in the handwriting of the testator, a date cannot be inferred. See Succession of Boyd, 306 So.2d 687 (La.1975); Succession of Lefort, 139 La. 51, 71 So. 215 (La.1916). Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal is reversed and the judgment of the trial court vacating the judgment of possession and appointing Mr. Sanders as administrator of the succession is reinstated.