Succession of Livaudais
Succession of Livaudais
Opinion of the Court
This is an action brought by Mrs. Ruth Gauthier Budensky, a daughter of the decedent, to have the sum of Eleven Thousand Six Hundred Forty-Eight and 75/100 ($11,648.75) Dollars collated into the Succession of her mother, Laura Monroe Gauthier Livaudais. This sum was withdrawn from a Hibernia Homestead Association Savings Account on January 27, 1970, where it was deposited in the name of Laura Livaudais or Mrs. Yvonne Berges and the withdrawal was made by Mrs. Berges, who is a second daughter of the decedent, the decedent having died on February 5, 1970, a short time following the withdrawal of the funds from the account. The question therefore presented by the action for collation is: who was the owner of the $11,648.75 withdrawn by Mrs. Berges on January 27, 1970. If the money was in fact the property of the decedent Mrs. Livaudais, then collation must necessarily occur. If the money was the property of Mrs. Berges, then of course collation need not take place.
The Trial Judge found, at the conclusion of the trial, that the funds were the property of Mrs. Berges and that collation therefore need not take place, and Mrs. Budensky’s petition was dismissed at her cost.
The Trial Judge found that Mrs. Buden-sky had not proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the money in question belonged to the decedent. He also found affirmatively that the funds did in fact belong to Mrs. Berges. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.
There were several accounts opened, all of which were opened in the Hibernia Homestead Association, hereinafter re
There is therefore no question that Mrs. Berges received the total amount of funds deposited in the account at the time that it was closed, and the sole question for determination therefore is the ownership of these funds at the time the withdrawal was made.
Our reading of the record satisfies this Court as to two points. First, we are satisfied that in rendering the judgment that the funds in question belonged to Mrs. Berges, the Trial Judge in no way abused the much discretion vested in him in finding the facts which he found. Secondly our reading of the record also convinces us that there is more than sufficient evidence in the record to support the facts found by the Trial Judge.
It is apparent that Mrs. Livaudais, during the course of her life after the death of her husband and during the period which these various accounts were opened and closed, did not have sufficient income at any time to accumulate the quantum of money that was in this account at the time. Her sole income, from the testimony of even the plaintiff, was that of Social Security which she received and which did not aggregate $100.00 per month.
Mrs. Berges, the defendant, on the other hand, was constantly employed for many years as a waitress and during that period received sufficient income in wages and tips to have accumulated the quantum of money involved in these accounts. There is ample evidence in the record that Mrs. Berges did not trust banks and saved her money and gave it to her mother to keep for her because of her distrust of banks. It is also clear from the record that her mother, sometime around the end of 1960, shortly prior to the initial deposit in the Homestead, told her sister Mrs. Horeske, that she had money for Mrs. Berges which Mrs. Berges had given her to keep for her, that she was afraid to keep it in the house, and that she was going to deposit it in a bank without her daughter’s knowledge so that it would be safe. There is also ample evidence in the record to the effect that Mrs. Berges had no knowledge of the fact that these funds had been deposited in any bank until sometime in 1969, and that when she discovered this she herself made a deposit of $1,500.00 to the account which then existed in the name of her mother and herself.
There is in the record direct evidence from Mrs. Berges to the effect that the funds with which we are concerned was
In essence, we find that the evidence clearly and heavily preponderates favor of the proposition that the funds with which we are here concerned are the property of Mrs. Berges, given to her mother by Mrs. Berges for safe keeping, and deposited by the decedent in the Homestead for a long period of time without the knowledge of her daughter. We also find that the accounts to which these funds were deposited by the decedent were always opened in the name of the decedent and one of her sisters, so as to provide access to the account for Mrs. Berges in the event of her mother’s disability. We also find that after Mrs. Berges discovered that her funds had been deposited in a Homestead for a considerable period of time, that the name of the account was thereafter changed by opening a new account so as to reflect Mrs. Berges as a co-depositor with her mother.
Having found that the Trial Court’s judgment is in all respects correct, that judgment is affirmed, with the plaintiff to pay all cost of this appeal.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.