TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Succession of Winkler

Succession of Winkler.

Succession of Winkler, 166 So. 140 (La. 1936)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Louisiana · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 3, 1936
Docket
No. 33714.
Judges
Brunot
Citations
166 So. 140184 La. 4631936 La. LEXIS 1076

Opinion of the Court — Brunot

BRUNOT, Justice.

Peter Gabriel Winkler died intestate. Pie was married twice. Four children, all the issue of his first marriage, survive him. He left an estate, consisting of paraphernal personal property, and a surviving widow. An administration of the estate was provoked, and, by agreement of the interested parties, Leopold C. Winkler was appointed and qualified as administrator of the succession.

In due course the assets of the succession were assembled, the debts tabulated, and the administrator’s final account was filed. ■ Several alleged creditors of the deceased, and his surviving widow, who alleged herself to be the widow of the deceased, in necessitous circumstances, and, as such, entitled, as a privileged creditor of the estate, to the sum of $1,000, filed oppositions to the account. The oppositions *465 were heard, some of them were rejected, and the account was amended by affirming others, including the opposition of the widow of the deceased.

No appeal from the judgment was taken by any of the parties opposing the account, but the administrator appealed from that part of the judgment decreeing the widow of the deceased to be in necessitous circumstances and entitled, as a privileged creditor, to $1,000, and ordering the account amended accordingly.

The testimony of the widow is positive that she was left in dire necessity by the death of her husband. To offset this testimony, the appellant offered certain probate records from the clerk of court of the parish of Acadia, in which parish the succession of Mrs. Winkler’s first husband was opened.

These records show that, in the settlement of the affairs of that succession, Mrs. Winkler, who was at that time the widow of the deceased, Wenzel Ohlenforst, received from his succession a few hundred dollars. The record shows that this small sum was used after the death of her first husband for the purpose of educating her son, the issue of her first marriage, and that it was wholly expended several years before the death of her second husband, Peter Gabriel Winkler.

It would serve no useful purpose to review the facts further.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment appealed from is affirmed, the costs of the appeal to be paid by the succession.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1936: 119362026peak 1936 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Brown v. Tauzin168 So. 502 (La. 1936)

Most recent

  1. Brown v. Tauzin168 So. 502 (La. 1936)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list