Succession of David Jones
Louisiana Court of Appeal
6 So. 3d 331 (2009)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
David Jones and Harriet Jones (defendant) married in October 1956, had three children, and divorced in February 1976. David and Harriet remarried in April 1978. Months later, David filed a petition for separation from Harriet, and he subsequently filed an amended petition for annulment, or, in the alternative, for separation. Harriet’s attorney lost contact with Harriet, and there were no further filings in the matter. David began dating Ethel Jones (plaintiff) in 1978, and they married in April 1983. During the marriage, David and Ethel bought and sold property as a married couple, and David named Ethel as the beneficiary of his retirement benefits and life-insurance policy. David and Ethel lived together as a married couple until David died in March 2005. Ethel filed a petition to probate David’s estate. Harriet filed a petition seeking a declaration that Ethel’s marriage was a nullity and that Harriet would inherit as David’s surviving spouse. At trial, Ethel testified that she only learned that David was married to Harriet after David’s death. The trial court found that Ethel married David in good faith and held that Ethel was David’s legal wife and surviving spouse, meaning that Harriet did not receive a share of the estate. Harriet appealed, arguing that the trial court erroneously found that Ethel was David’s legal wife.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Peters, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.