## Facts

- Ronald R. Plummer used a preprinted “Revocable One-Party Living Trust” form dated June 25, 1999, and signed “Ronald R. Plummer,” but he never completed the trust instrument.
- Within the form, Plummer handwrote directions in a “Schedule of Beneficiaries and Distributive Shares,” identifying his siblings as beneficiaries and addressing administration and division of property upon his death.
- Plummer died on April 9, 2000, leaving a minor daughter, Cheronda Leshay Thomas.
- The child’s mother petitioned to open the succession and have it administered as intestate.
- Plummer’s siblings sought to probate the handwritten “Schedule” pages (removed from the trust form) as an olographic testament.
- After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court held the pages were not a valid olographic will because testamentary intent was not unmistakable and the signature’s authenticity was not proven.
- A transcript of the hearing could not be produced due to a recording malfunction; the parties submitted narrative summaries of testimony for the appellate record.

## Issues

1. Whether handwritten pages extracted from an incomplete preprinted revocable trust form constituted a valid Louisiana olographic testament.
2. Whether the absence of a verbatim hearing transcript prevented meaningful appellate review.

## Decision

- The court of appeal affirmed the judgment rejecting probate of the alleged olographic testament.
- The court held the reconstructed record (including narrative summaries and documentary evidence) was sufficient for appellate review.
- The court concluded the handwritten pages were inseparably tied to the preprinted trust form, did not satisfy the “entirely written” requirement, and did not show unmistakable testamentary intent.
- The succession proceeded as intestate.

## Legal Principles

- A Louisiana olographic testament must be entirely written, dated, and signed by the testator.
- The writing must reflect unmistakable testamentary intent to dispose of property at death; ambiguity or an instrument that functions primarily as trust administration directions defeats probate as a will.
- Handwritten provisions embedded in, and dependent on, a preprinted estate-planning form may fail the “entirely written” requirement when the printed text is integral to the document’s meaning.
- An appellate court may decide the merits when the record is adequately reconstructed through authorized narrative summaries and supporting documents.

## Conclusion

The court refused to treat handwritten beneficiary instructions drawn from an incomplete printed living-trust form as an olographic will because the writing depended on preprinted trust language, lacked unmistakable testamentary intent, and did not satisfy statutory formalities; the estate was administered under intestacy rules.


In re Succession of Plummer, 847 So. 2d 185 (La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003)