# Giroir v. Dumesnil

> Supreme Court of Louisiana · February 23, 1966 · 248 La. 1037

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9688931

## Case

- **Full name:** Lenus A. GIROIR Et Al. v. Frank A. DUMESNIL Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Louisiana
- **Decided:** February 23, 1966
- **Citations:** 248 La. 1037; 184 So. 2d 1; 21 A.L.R. 3d 765; 1966 La. LEXIS 2434
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by McCALEB
- **Judges:** Sanders, Hawthorne, McCaleb
- **Cited by:** 30 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9688931

## Opinion text

McCALEB, Justice
(dissenting).
I agree with the views of the Court of Appeal (see 172 So.2d 89 ) and, especially, those of Judge ad Hoc Ellender which are quoted with approval by the Court of Appeal (see 172 So.2d at page 99 ).
In my opinion, the will is neither ambiguous nor is its bequest to the testator’s wife contradictory as the majority opinion apparently conceives. It distinctly bequeaths to the wife enjoyment and usufruct during her life of all property; it does not bequeath “all property”. Hence, the descriptive language following the disposition concerning the wife’s use of the bequest, viz — -“for her to do with, enjoy and dispose of as she pleases, and as a thing belonging to her” plainly refers to the thing given (usufruct of the property “during her life”) and not to the property itself as the wife, according to the proper signification of the terms of the testament cannot be regarded as universal legatee.
Article 1712 of the Civil Code governs the case; it should be applied.
I respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9688931. Public record. Not legal advice.