Articles Posted in Miscellaneous

When you select someone to serve as a trustee or executor, you expect they will act in your best interest. If someone in such a position of trust breaches that obligation, they might be liable for a breach of fiduciary duties. 

Fred Houston’s wife died, leaving him a life insurance policy. Hanh Williams helped Houston collect the insurance proceeds and over time, became involved in all aspects of his financial affairs, including his oil and gas interests. Houston gave Williams his power of attorney the next year. 

Then, approximately two years later, Houston formed a trust and made Williams the trustee. The trust contained almost all of Houston’s assets. If either Houston or Williams died, the trust would terminate. Houston then executed a will that left a few specific bequests, with the remainder of his estate to go to Louisiana State University (“LSU”). Houston subsequently passed away, and Williams filed for probate. 

A difficult part of dealing with a family member’s death is balancing your grief with having to deal with the practical considerations of administering their estate. This can lead to family conflict, especially when there is disagreement about who gets what. Although clear language in a will or testament can help avoid such disagreement, what happens when the language of the testament and related documentation are unclear about who the deceased wanted to receive specific bank accounts?

When Elizabeth Perritt died, she left a notarial testament. The testament named the executrix of her estate, bequeathed several specific items to specific people, and left the remainder of her property to three specific individuals (the “Residuary Recipients”). The testament stated she had designated beneficiaries for certain unnamed bank accounts pursuant to the “payable on death” provisions of La. R.S. 6:314. 

The Residuary Recipients and Carroll Toms all argued they were entitled to the deposit accounts. Peritt’s executrix filed a motion to determine who was entitled to two of Perritt’s deposit accounts held at Home Federal Bank. The trial court held the Residuary Recipients were entitled to split the deposit accounts. Toms filed an appeal.

When you are in love, you might make purchases for your loved ones without giving them much thought. But what happens to big ticket purchases, like a car, if your relationship sours?

William Redmon and Leisha Lindsey were acquaintances from high school. They started seeing each other. Lindsey said she just wanted to be friends with Redmon, but Redmon wanted a romantic relationship. 

Redmon gave Lindsey several gifts during the time, including cash, a fishing pole, various tools, and appliances. Redmon planned a surprise birthday party for Lindsey. Three days later, he bought an engagement ring, which Lindsey never wore, and a Chevrolet Camaro for Lindsey. 

Entering into a settlement agreement can help efficiently resolve a lawsuit and allow both parties to move forward. However, sometimes you might be involved in multiple interrelated lawsuits. If you sign a settlement agreement with one party, are you precluded from pursuing other related litigation?

Donald Hodge Sr., who is now deceased, owned a deer farm located in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. The Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry (“LDAF”) learn the herd possibly had Chronic Wasting Disease, which likely came from six deer purchased from a farm in Pennsylvania. LDAF put a quarantine over the Hodge Farm. Hodge died the next day before he knew about the quarantine. 

Once the quarantine was in place, LDAF tried to locate the deer purchased from Pennsylvania. However, there were no deer at the Hodge Farm with tags indicating they were the likely inflected deer. Hodge’s children and administrators of his estate filed a lawsuit against LDAF. They wanted to lift the quarantine so they could sell the farm. They claimed the at-issue farm had been delivered to a different deer farm located in Mississippi, owned by Jared Oertling. The Hodges also sought damages from LDAF associated with the costs they incurred from the quarantine. 

Prescription refers to the amount of time you have to file a lawsuit. If you do not comply with this procedural requirement, your case will be dismissed. In order to determine the date by which you must file your lawsuit, you need to know both the prescription period and when the period started to run. This case analyzes when the prescription period starts to run for false imprisonment and false arrest claims. 

The Eunice Police Department arrested Paul Powell, Marlon Eaglin, and two others. They were charged with second degree murder. A few months after his release from prison, Eaglin filed a lawsuit against the police department, the city of Eunice, and the chief of police (the “defendants”) for false arrest and imprisonment. Over a year after their arrest, but less than year after they were released from prison, Eaglin amended his lawsuit to add Powell as a plaintiff.

The defendants filed an exception of prescription, arguing Powell’s claims were prescribed because he filed them over a year after the date of his arrest. Powell argued he had not exceeded the one-year prescription period because his claims related back to Eaglin’s claims, which had been filed within the required time period. Powell also claimed his false imprisonment claim was not prescribed because he had filed it within a year of being released from prison.