Succession of Tiffany Angelle Arthur ( 2020 )


Menu:
  • SUCCESSION OF TIFFANY ANGELLE                          NO. 20-CA-75
    ARTHUR
    FIFTH CIRCUIT
    COURT OF APPEAL
    STATE OF LOUISIANA
    ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
    PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA
    NO. 785-620, DIVISION "E"
    HONORABLE FRANK A. BRINDISI, JUDGE PRESIDING
    May 27, 2020
    JUDE G. GRAVOIS
    JUDGE
    Panel composed of Judges Jude G. Gravois,
    Hans J. Liljeberg, and John J. Molaison, Jr.
    AFFIRMED
    JGG
    HJL
    JJM
    COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT,
    SHAWN SUBERVILLE TERREBONNE (ORIGINALLY PETITIONED AS
    "SHAWN TERREBONNE SUBERVIELLE")
    Robert M. Braiwick, Jr.
    GRAVOIS, J.
    Appellant, Shawn Terrebonne Subervielle, administratrix of the Succession
    of Tiffany Angelle Arthur, appeals the trial court’s August 23, 2019 judgment
    which denied her Rule to Show Cause Why Succession Assets Should Not Be
    Accounted For and Released to Administratrix. The judgment on appeal in this
    case involves interpretation of specific provisions of a testamentary trust. No
    evidence was introduced at the contradictory hearing on the Rule to Show Cause.
    Finding that the record does not contain evidentiary support in favor of the claims
    made in the Rule to Show Cause, we affirm the trial court’s judgment which
    denied the Rule to Show Cause.
    FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
    On July 13, 2018, Shawn Terrebonne Subervielle filed a “Petition to
    Appointment [sic] Administratrix” of the Succession of Tiffany Angelle Arthur,
    No. 785-620 of the 24th Judicial District Court, Parish of Jefferson, State of
    Louisiana, alleging therein that on August 27, 2018,1 Tiffany Angelle Arthur died
    in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, that it was necessary that Ms. Arthur’s estate be
    administered, that Ms. Arthur was survived by two minor twin sons, Brody
    Michael Arthur and Brice Matthew Arthur, who were born on April 9, 2009, and
    that Ms. Subervielle had been granted custody of Brody and Brice by the Juvenile
    Court. In her petition, Ms. Subervielle further alleged that she desired to be
    appointed administratrix of the succession proceeding upon her complying with the
    legal requirements therefor. After considering the petition and other pleadings
    filed by Ms. Subervielle, the trial court proceeded on July 13, 2018 to appoint her
    as administratrix of the succession proceeding.
    1
    Although the petition states that Ms. Arthur died on August 27, 2018, the Affidavit of
    Jurisdiction, Death and Heirship found in the record clarifies that Ms. Arthur actually died on August 27,
    2017.
    20-CA-75                                             1
    On September 10, 2018, Ms. Subervielle filed the subject Rule to Show
    Cause Why Succession Assets Should Not Be Accounted For and Released to
    Administratrix, alleging therein that pursuant to the last will and testament of Ms.
    Arthur’s mother, Vera Frances Barrient, filed for probate with the Clerk of Court
    of the 24th Judicial District Court, Ms. Barrient’s estate was bequeathed to the Vera
    Frances Barrient Trust (“the Trust”) of which Ms. Arthur was a fifty percent
    income and principal beneficiary. In the Rule to Show Cause, Ms. Subervielle
    further alleged that the Trust provided that the Trust shall terminate as to the
    interest of each principal beneficiary upon such beneficiary’s death, and
    accordingly, because Ms. Arthur was then deceased, her succession owned and
    was entitled to possession of a fifty percent interest in the Trust that should be
    released to Ms. Subervielle as administratrix of Ms. Arthur’s succession. Made
    defendant in the Rule to Show Cause was Linda Barrient McCraney, as trustee of
    the Trust.
    Ms. McCraney filed an opposition to the Rule to Show Cause, alleging that
    although the Trust provided that it shall terminate as to the interest of each
    principal beneficiary upon such beneficiary’s death, the Trust also provided, in
    accordance with the Louisiana Trust Code, that Brice and Brody’s interest in the
    Trust will terminate in whole or in part at any time on or after Brody and Brice
    have reached their 21st birthday. Accordingly, she argued that since Brody and
    Brice were still minors, the court should deny the Rule to Show Cause.
    A hearing on the Rule to Show Cause was conducted on August 23, 2019.
    No evidence was introduced by either party at the hearing. After hearing argument
    of counsel, the trial court denied the Rule to Show Cause, finding that under the
    terms of the Trust, Ms. McCraney, whom the Trust had appointed as custodian for
    the minor children under the Louisiana Uniform Gift to Minors Act, was the proper
    person to receive the claimed distribution from the Trust, and not Ms. Subervielle,
    20-CA-75                                   2
    though no distribution was ordered therein. A judgment to this effect was signed
    by the trial court that same day. After Ms. Subervielle’s Motion for New Trial on
    the Rule to Show Cause was denied after a hearing, Ms. Subervielle timely filed a
    Motion for Appeal of the trial court’s August 23, 2019 judgment which denied the
    Rule to Show Cause. The trial court granted Ms. Subervielle a devolutive appeal
    on January 7, 2020. This appeal followed.
    On appeal, Ms. Subervielle argues that the trial court erred in finding that
    Ms. McCraney, as trustee of the Trust, rather than Ms. Subervielle, as
    administratrix of the succession, was the proper person to receive the claimed
    distribution from the Trust. Ms. McCraney did not file an appellee brief with this
    Court.
    ANALYSIS
    In its August 23, 2019 judgment, the trial court denied the Rule to Show
    Cause Why Succession Assets Should not be Released to Administratrix. The
    judgment then goes on to state:
    Shawn Terrebonne Subervielle argues that the assets in possession of
    Linda Barrient McCraney, Trustee of the Vera Frances Barrient Trust,
    which belong to the Succession of Tiffany Angelle Arthur, should be
    turned over to Shawn Terrebonne Subervielle as the administratrix of
    the Succession. The Court finds that Article III, Part B of the Trust
    governs. That provision states that if any person under the age of
    eighteen is or becomes entitled to receive in outright ownership any
    interest in the property as an outright legacy, the distribution from the
    Trust is to be paid to a custodian under the Louisiana Uniform
    Transfers to Minors Act. The Trust names Linda McCraney as the
    custodian, and therefore, the Court finds that Shawn Terrebonne
    Subervielle is not the proper person to receive a distribution from the
    Trust.
    The issue raised in the Rule to Show Cause was interpretation of specific
    provisions of the Trust. A rule to show cause is a contradictory motion, and as
    such, it is incumbent upon the moving party to produce evidence which supports
    the relief sought. La. C.C.P. art. 963. As indicated above, at the hearing on the
    Rule to Show Cause, no testimony was adduced and no exhibits were introduced.
    20-CA-75                                     3
    Only portions of what purport to be certain provisions of the Trust were excerpted
    in both the Rule to Show Cause and the Opposition thereto. We find, however,
    that such excerpts, having not been properly introduced into evidence, provide an
    insufficient evidentiary basis upon which to grant the relief sought in the Rule to
    Show Cause.2 We find that it was incumbent upon Ms. Subervielle, as mover in
    the Rule, to at least introduce into evidence at the contradictory hearing on the
    Rule a certified copy of Mrs. Barrient’s last will and testament which purportedly
    established the Trust. Because the record does not contain evidentiary support in
    favor of the claims made in the Rule to Show Cause, the trial court properly denied
    the Rule to Show Cause.
    In light of the foregoing, under the particular factual and procedural
    circumstances present in this case, we affirm the trial court’s judgment which
    denied the Rule to Show Cause.
    CONCLUSION
    For the foregoing reasons, the judgment rendered by the trial court on
    August 23, 2019 denying Ms. Subervielle’s Rule to Show Cause is affirmed.
    AFFIRMED
    2
    No document or exhibit purporting be the testament of Vera Frances Barrient appears in the
    appellate record, either. A document entitled “Last Will and Testament of Vera Frances Barrient” is
    appended to appellant’s brief. The law is clear that an appellate court is precluded from considering
    evidence that is not part of the record. Examination of exhibits attached to an appellate brief, but not
    offered into evidence at trial, is beyond the scope of our review. United Gen. Title Ins. Co. v. Casey Title,
    Ltd., 01-600 (La. App. 5 Cir. 10/30/01), 
    800 So.2d 1061
    , 1065, citing Davis v. St. Jude Medical Center,
    Inc., 94-353 (La. App. 5 Cir. 10/25/94), 
    645 So.2d 771
    , 772, writ denied, 94-2864 (La. 1/27/95), 
    649 So.2d 387
    .
    20-CA-75                                              4
    SUSAN M. CHEHARDY                                                             CURTIS B. PURSELL
    CHIEF JUDGE                                                                   CLERK OF COURT
    MARY E. LEGNON
    FREDERICKA H. WICKER
    CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
    JUDE G. GRAVOIS
    MARC E. JOHNSON
    ROBERT A. CHAISSON                                                            SUSAN BUCHHOLZ
    STEPHEN J. WINDHORST
    FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
    HANS J. LILJEBERG
    JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR.                         FIFTH CIRCUIT
    MELISSA C. LEDET
    JUDGES                                101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053)
    DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF
    POST OFFICE BOX 489
    GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054               (504) 376-1400
    (504) 376-1498 FAX
    www.fifthcircuit.org
    NOTICE OF JUDGMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY
    I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE OPINION IN THE BELOW-NUMBERED MATTER HAS BEEN DELIVERED
    IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 2-16.4 AND 2-16.5 THIS DAY
    MAY 27, 2020 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, CLERK OF COURT, COUNSEL OF RECORD AND ALL PARTIES NOT
    REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:
    20-CA-75
    E-NOTIFIED
    24TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT (CLERK)
    HONORABLE FRANK A. BRINDISI (DISTRICT JUDGE)
    ROBERT M. BRAIWICK, JR. (APPELLANT)
    MAILED
    CLINT L. PIERSON, JR. (ATTORNEY)       LINDA B. MCCRANEY (APPELLEE)
    5100 VILLAGE WALK                      IN PROPER PERSON
    SUITE 101                              75397 HENDERSON ROAD
    COVINGTON, LA 70433                    COVINGTON, LA 70435
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-CA-75

Judges: Frank A. Brindisi

Filed Date: 5/27/2020

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/21/2024