In re Dimmick's Estate
In re Dimmick's Estate, 35 So. 801 (La. 1903).
Cited by
- Pic v. Mente & Co. 9 So. 2d 532 La. 1942
- Baird v. Thibodo 199 So. 585 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1941
- Succession of Jones 180 So. 489 La. 1938
- Succession of Carroll 164 So. 334 La. 1935
- Succession of Gandolfo 136 So. 561 La. 1931
- Uncle Sam Planting & Mfg. Co. v. Reynaud 124 So. 827 La. 1929
- Succession of Crouch 8 La. App. 86 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1927
- Interstate Trust & Banking Co. v. Young 65 So. 611 La. 1914
Opinion text
On Application for Rehearing. (Feb. 1, 1904.) PER CURIAM. The statute provides that for failure to file an account every 12 months, or for failure to deposit the moneys of the succession in one of the chartered banks of the state, or for withdrawing the funds of the succession from bank without an order of court, the executor shall pay 'a certain interest per annum on the funds involved. Against the enforcement of this statute the execjitor pleaded the prescription of one year applicable to debts arising ex delicto. It appeared to the court so obvious that prescription did not apply to this running interest, that the plea was passed over in silence, whereby, in effect, it was overruled. The executor complains, on application for a rehearing, that the court should have passed on the plea. In a sense, the complaint is well founded. The plea was expressly made, and should have been passed upon. It was overruled for the reasons, among others, that a statute which provides for running interest at a certain per cent, a year, by its very terms, excludes the idea that the right to recover the interest so provided for can be prescribed by one year, and that prescription cannot run in favor of the executor against the succession he represents. Rehearing refused.