attestation clause in Louisiana

2017See Succession of Eck, 233 La. 764 , 98 So.2d 181 [ (1957) ]; Succession of Nourse, 234 La. 691 , 101 So.2d 204 [ (1958) ].

2017See Succession of Eck, 233 La. 764 , 98 So.2d 181 [ (1957) ]; Succession of Nourse, 234 La. 691 , 101 So.2d 204 [ (1958) ].

2021C.C.] art. 1577, because the testament was not signed on each separate page, the attestation clause was not in proper form, and the notary, witnesses, and testator were not in the presence of each other at the execution of the testament.” Id.

2019Relying on the recent opinion by the Louisiana Supreme Court, Successions of Toney, 2016-1534 (La. 5/3/2017), 226 So. 3d 397 , the trial court found the Will’s attestation clause was deficient.

2018In Succession of Bilyeu , 28,701 (La.App. 2 Cir. 9/25/96), 681 So.2d 56 , writ denied , 96-2868 (La. 1/24/97), 686 So.2d 862 , the court held that an incorrect reference to the testator, who was a man, as "she" and "her" in the attestation clause was a typographical error that did not nullify the will.

2000An example of the type of deviation which will be allowed in an attestation clause can also be found in Succession of Bilyeu, 28,701 (La.App. 2 Cir. 9/25/96); 681 So.2d 56 , writ denied, 96-2868 (La.1/24/97); 686 So.2d 862 .

1970In Succession of Saarela, 151 So.2d 144 (La.App.1963), cert. denied, 244 La. 466 , 152 So.2d 562 , the attestation clause itself purported to be a recital by the testator that “I have signed this my last will”.

1968In Succession of Saarela, 151 So.2d 144 (La.App. 4th Cir., 1963), writs denied 244 La. 466 , 152 So.2d 562 (1963), the attestation clause recited: "In witness whereof, I have signed this my last will and testament in the presence *225 of the witnesses hereinafter named and undersigned, who sign in my presence and in the presence of each other, and in the presence of the undersigned Notary * * *." There was no positive certification that the notary then and there, and in the presence of all parties affixed his signature, however, on the point at issue, the court found that the statute was compl

1970In Succession of Saarela, 151 So.2d 144 (La.App.1963), cert. denied, 244 La. 466 , 152 So.2d 562 , the attestation clause itself purported to be a recital by the testator that “I have signed this my last will”.

1970In Succession of Saarela, 151 So.2d 144 (La.App.1963), cert. denied, 244 La. 466 , 152 So.2d 562 , the attestation clause itself purported to be a recital by the testator that “I have signed this my last will”.

2017See In re Succession of Hebert, 12-281 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/12) , 101 So.3d 131 ; Succession of Armstrong, 93-2385 (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/28/94) , 636 So.2d 1109 , writ denied, 94-1370 (La. 9/16/94), 642 So.2d 196 ; cf. Succession of Bel, 377 So.2d 1380 (La.App. 4th Cir.1979)(statutory will that contained a date in the attestation clause but not in the will itself was nevertheless valid).

1982Insofar as appellant’s contention that the wills are invalid because the date appears only in the attestation clause, this issue has been resolved in the Succ. of Bel, 377 So.2d 1380 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1980).

2017See In re Succession of Hebert, 12-281 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/12) , 101 So.3d 131 ; Succession of Armstrong, 93-2385 (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/28/94) , 636 So.2d 1109 , writ denied, 94-1370 (La. 9/16/94), 642 So.2d 196 ; cf. Succession of Bel, 377 So.2d 1380 (La.App. 4th Cir.1979)(statutory will that contained a date in the attestation clause but not in the will itself was nevertheless valid).

2014The court reasoned that, while the failure to date the attestation clause is a serious defect, the date was placed at the end of the disposition portion of the will and again at the end of the attestation portion below the witnesses’ signatures and immediately above the notary’s signature. 636 So.2d at 1112 .

2003Finally, she takes issue with the trial court’s reliance on Succession of Fletcher, 94-1426 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/5/95) , 653 So.2d 119 , which she asserts is inapplicable to the case at bar. | .The appellee maintains that the phrase “is able to see and read” is not mandatory and that the attestation clause as drafted is “substantially similar” to the attestation clause found in article 1578.

1996Succession of Fletcher, 94-1426 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 04/05/95), 653 So.2d 119 , review denied, 95-1105 (La. 06/16/95), 655 So.2d 338 .

1970In Succession of Thibodeaux, 238 La. 791 , 116 So.2d 525 , we reiterated a basic principle of construction of wills, that the validity of a will is to be maintained if possible.In construing an attestation clause we will not require strict, technical, and pedantic compliance in form or in language.

1970In Succession of Thibodeaux, 238 La. 791 , 116 So.2d 525 , we reiterated a basic principle of construction of wills, that the validity of a will is to be maintained if possible.In construing an attestation clause we will not require strict, technical, and pedantic compliance in form or in language.

2023App. 2d Cir. 1128104), 865 So.2d 307 , where the witnesses and notary signed above, rather than below, the attestation clause.

2019Succession of Harvey, supra; Succession of Rogers, supra. The second deviation we see is that the attestation clause does not explicitly state that the testator signed “at the end and on each other separate page.” However, as held by this Court in Succession of Dawson, supra at 425 , an attestation clause is not defective because there is no declaration that the testator signed the will at its end when the will itself “is clearly signed by the testator at the end and on each separate page[.]” Likewise, this Court in Succession of Pesnell, supra at 846-47, found that an attestation clause of a

2019Succession of Harvey, supra; Succession of Rogers, supra. The second deviation we see is that the attestation clause does not explicitly state that the testator signed “at the end and on each other separate page.” However, as held by this Court in Succession of Dawson, supra at 425 , an attestation clause is not defective because there is no declaration that the testator signed the will at its end when the will itself “is clearly signed by the testator at the end and on each separate page[.]” Likewise, this Court in Succession of Pesnell, supra at 846-47, found that an attestation clause of a

2019See, Successions of Toney, supra; Succession of Pesnell, supra; Succession of Dawson, supra; Succession of Harvey, supra. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, although the attestation clause does not contain the phrase “at the end and on each other separate page,” we find that the attestation clause meets all other requirements for the execution of a notarial testament under La.

2017See In re Succession of Hebert, 12-281 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/12) , 101 So.3d 131 ; Succession of Armstrong, 93-2385 (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/28/94) , 636 So.2d 1109 , writ denied, 94-1370 (La. 9/16/94), 642 So.2d 196 ; cf. Succession of Bel, 377 So.2d 1380 (La.App. 4th Cir.1979)(statutory will that contained a date in the attestation clause but not in the will itself was nevertheless valid).

2017As noted by the Court of Appeal in this case, the alleged “attestation clauses” at issue in this case are nearly identical to the ones found deficient in In re Succession of Seal, 10-0351 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/10/10) , 2010 WL 3527597 (unpublished), writ denied, 10-2294 (La. 1/28/11), 56 So.3d 964 , in which the propounded testament was declared invalid.

2014Citing Succession of Songne, 94-1198 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/2/95) , 664 So.2d 556 , writ denied, 95-2877 (La.2/2/96), 666 So.2d 1101 , Mrs. [ ^Holbrook further asserts that, because the date is set forth on each page of the will, the affidavits submitted in opposition to the motion for summary judgment are sufficient to resolve any ambiguity in the date. 1 As the court of appeal noted, La.

2014Citing Succession of Songne, 94-1198 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/2/95) , 664 So.2d 556 , writ denied, 95-2877 (La.2/2/96), 666 So.2d 1101 , Mrs. [ ^Holbrook further asserts that, because the date is set forth on each page of the will, the affidavits submitted in opposition to the motion for summary judgment are sufficient to resolve any ambiguity in the date. 1 As the court of appeal noted, La.

2014In re Succession of Dunaway, supra. As in the case sub judice, in In re Succession of Simno, 06-1169 (La.App. 4th Cir.12/29/06), 948 So.2d 315 , the final paragraph of the will read, “I hereby sign my name in the presence of the two undersigned competent witnesses and notary public affirming that this is my last will and testament on the date aforementioned above.” The Simno court found that the final paragraph was an attestation clause of the testator, not the notary or witnesses, and that an attestation clause of a testator cannot be substituted as an attestation clause for the notary and wi