Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1956–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Louisiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Cavalier v. Mobil Oil Corp.green2 sentences2011Further, distributing proceeds through Cy Pres satisfies class action goals by deterring similar conduct and disgorging the defendant of profits wrongfully obtained, and using those funds in a way that at least indirectly benefits the class members.” Cavalier v. Mobil Oil Corporation, 2004-1543, pp. 6-7 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/2/05), 898 So.2d 584, 588-89 (citing Susan Beth Farmer, More Lessons Learned from the Laboratories: Cy Pres Distributions in Parents Pat-riae Antitrust Actions Brought by State Attorneys General, 68 FORD. 2011Further, distributing proceeds through Cy Pres satisfies class action goals by deterring similar conduct and disgorging the defendant of profits wrongfully obtained, and using those funds in a way that at least indirectly benefits the class members.” Cavalier v. Mobil Oil Corporation, 2004-1543, pp. 6-7 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/2/05), 898 So.2d 584, 588-89 (citing Susan Beth Farmer, More Lessons Learned from the Laboratories: Cy Pres Distributions in Parents Pat-riae Antitrust Actions Brought by State Attorneys General, 68 FORD. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Executors of McDonoghgreen1 sentence1973See State v. Executors of McDonogh, 8 La.Ann. 171 (1953); Succ. of Vance, 39 La.Ann. 371 , 2 So. 54 (1887); de Pontalba v. New Orleans, 3 La.Ann. 660 (1848). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Succession of Milne
green
2 sentences1985In Milne’s Succession, supra, the court stated that R.S. 9:2331 et seq. “introduces the ‘Cy Pres’ doctrine into Louisiana Law”, then quoted from 10 Am.Jur., Charities, sec. 129, a passage that “the doctrine of cy pres adopted to this extent is in harmony with the equitable rule that a liberal construction is to be given to charitable donations to accomplish the general charitable intent of the donor” and concluded that “the doctrine of cy pres as applied in the United States is the doctrine of approximation” and that “the doctrine of approximation is a Civil Law doctrine which has been long re 1985In Milne’s Succession, supra, the court stated that R.S. 9:2331 et seq. “introduces the ‘Cy Pres’ doctrine into Louisiana Law”, then quoted from 10 Am.Jur., Charities, sec. 129, a passage that “the doctrine of cy pres adopted to this extent is in harmony with the equitable rule that a liberal construction is to be given to charitable donations to accomplish the general charitable intent of the donor” and concluded that “the doctrine of cy pres as applied in the United States is the doctrine of approximation” and that “the doctrine of approximation is a Civil Law doctrine which has been long re | 3 | 1965–2018 |
Succession of Vance
green
2 sentences1973See State v. Executors of McDonogh, 8 La.Ann. 171 (1953); Succ. of Vance, 39 La.Ann. 371 , 2 So. 54 (1887); de Pontalba v. New Orleans, 3 La.Ann. 660 (1848). 1956In Succession of Vance, 39 La.Ann. 371 , 2 So. 54 , we said: “The supreme court of this state has, in a memorable litigation, well said that legacies of this class are known to the civil law, from the formation of Christianity, as legacies for pious uses, and are an element in the polity of municipal administration in all countries which have preserved the features and jurisprudence of Roman civilization. | 2 | 1956–1973 |
Adams v. CSX Railroads
green
1 sentence2018R.S. 9:2331, and cites Adams v. CSX R.R. , 12-139 (La. 4/13/12), 84 So.3d 1289 , in support of its position. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
In re Succession of Mizell
green
1 sentence2018More recently, the meaning of the cy pres doctrine was explained in In re Succession of Mizell , 468 So.2d 1371 , 1376-77 (La. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
McDonogh v. Dutillet
neutral
1 sentence1973See State v. Executors of McDonogh, 8 La.Ann. 171 (1953); Succ. of Vance, 39 La.Ann. 371 , 2 So. 54 (1887); de Pontalba v. New Orleans, 3 La.Ann. 660 (1848). | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Girven v. Miller
green
2 sentences1965LSA-C.C. art. 1713 provides: “A disposition must be understood in the sense in which it can have effect, rather than that in which it can have none.” In Girven v. Miller, 219 La. 252 , 52 So.2d 843 , the court held: “In interpretation of acts of last will we are bound, under Article 1712 of the Civil Code, to ascertain the intention of the testator ‘without departing, however, from the proper signification of the terms of the testament’ and it is our duty, under Article 1713, to construe the disposition in the sense so that it will be given effect, if possible. * * * ” 52 So.2d at 845 . (1) Ev 1965LSA-C.C. art. 1713 provides: “A disposition must be understood in the sense in which it can have effect, rather than that in which it can have none.” In Girven v. Miller, 219 La. 252 , 52 So.2d 843 , the court held: “In interpretation of acts of last will we are bound, under Article 1712 of the Civil Code, to ascertain the intention of the testator ‘without departing, however, from the proper signification of the terms of the testament’ and it is our duty, under Article 1713, to construe the disposition in the sense so that it will be given effect, if possible. * * * ” 52 So.2d at 845 . (1) Ev | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Succession of Lambert
green
2 sentences1956Counsel argues that The Poydras Female Asylum was a conjoint legatee of Milne of the lands in question; that the legacy has lapsed, or should now be annulled, rescinded and revoked, because of the averred violation of the condition imposed by the testator; that The Female Orphan Society (formerly The Poydras Female Asylum) is a universal residuary legatee under a conjoint legacy, and as such is entitled to all or at least one-fourth of the funds now available for distribution; that the legacy is different from those considered in the cases of Succession of Lambert, 210 La. 636 , 28 So.2d 1 , a 1956Counsel argues that The Poydras Female Asylum was a conjoint legatee of Milne of the lands in question; that the legacy has lapsed, or should now be annulled, rescinded and revoked, because of the averred violation of the condition imposed by the testator; that The Female Orphan Society (formerly The Poydras Female Asylum) is a universal residuary legatee under a conjoint legacy, and as such is entitled to all or at least one-fourth of the funds now available for distribution; that the legacy is different from those considered in the cases of Succession of Lambert, 210 La. 636 , 28 So.2d 1 , a | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Succession of Rougon
green
2 sentences1956Counsel argues that The Poydras Female Asylum was a conjoint legatee of Milne of the lands in question; that the legacy has lapsed, or should now be annulled, rescinded and revoked, because of the averred violation of the condition imposed by the testator; that The Female Orphan Society (formerly The Poydras Female Asylum) is a universal residuary legatee under a conjoint legacy, and as such is entitled to all or at least one-fourth of the funds now available for distribution; that the legacy is different from those considered in the cases of Succession of Lambert, 210 La. 636 , 28 So.2d 1 , a 1956Counsel argues that The Poydras Female Asylum was a conjoint legatee of Milne of the lands in question; that the legacy has lapsed, or should now be annulled, rescinded and revoked, because of the averred violation of the condition imposed by the testator; that The Female Orphan Society (formerly The Poydras Female Asylum) is a universal residuary legatee under a conjoint legacy, and as such is entitled to all or at least one-fourth of the funds now available for distribution; that the legacy is different from those considered in the cases of Succession of Lambert, 210 La. 636 , 28 So.2d 1 , a | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.