Case Name: Succession of Edese HOLLIER
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1964-07-01
Citations: 171 So. 2d 656
Docket Number: No. 47055
Parties: Succession of Edese HOLLIER.
Judges: SANDERS and SUMMERS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 171
Pages: 656–659

Head Matter:
247 La. 384
Succession of Edese HOLLIER.
No. 47055.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
July 1, 1964.
On Rehearing Jan. 18, 1965.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 23, 1965.
Guillory, Guillory & Guillory, Isom J. Guillory, Jr., Eunice, Roland Reed, Ville Platte, for relators.
Preston N. Aucoin, Ville Platte, for plaintiff-appellee.

Opinion:
HAMLIN, Justice.
In the exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction (Art. VII, Sec. 11, LSA-Const. of 1921), we directed certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, in order that we might review its judgment which affirmed a judgment of the trial court decreeing (a) that Item 141 of the inventory taken in the Succession of Edese Hollier belongs to the community of acquets and gains which existed between the decedent, Edese Hollier, and the plaintiff in opposition, Dea Aitcoin Hollier, and (b) that the notary who took the inventory reclassify Item 141 of the inventory as community property instead of separate property of the decedent. 245 La. 648, 160 So.2d 231, La.App., 158 So.2d 351.
The principal issue presented for determination is whether the classification of the partnership ownership interest involved — as distinguished from the partnership profits— was properly classified as separate property of the deceased Edese Hollier, or whether same fell into and belongs to the deceased's second community.
We have carefully reviewed the record and have thoroughly studied the findings of the Court of Appeal set forth in its opinion. We conclude that it correctly and clearly treated all issues of this case, and that there is no need for repetition. We adopt the opinion of the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, reported at 158 So.2d 351, as the opinion of this Court.
For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, is affirmed. The costs of this Court to be borne by relators.
SANDERS and SUMMERS, JJ., concur.
. "ITEM 141. A certain undivided interest, say, a 20% interest in and to tlie partnership of F. Hollier & Sons, which partnership is domiciled at 204 Northwest Railroad Avenue in tlie Town of Ville Platte, Evangeline Parish, Louisiana. That, among the assets of said partnership is contained, but not limited to, the following real estate,
. See, also Peters v. Klein, 161 La. 664, 109 So. 349, 350 [1], citing Kittredge v. Grau, 158 La. 154, 103 So. 723. In Peters v. Klein, the author of the instant opinion was one of the attorneys for Michael D. Klein.