Scott v. Briscoe
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., March 14, 1978 357 So. 2d 853; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., November 13, 1972 270 So. 2d 611; La. Ct. App. 2d Cir., January 26, 1960 117 So. 2d 610
Scott v. Briscoe, 37 La. Ann. 178 (1885).
Cited by
- Succession of Bradley 8 La. App. 260 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
- Quaker Realty Co. v. Labasse 60 So. 661 La. 1912
- Grandchampt v. Billis' Heirs 46 So. 348 La. 1908
Opinion text
The opinion of the Court was delivered by Manning, J. The plaintiff is one of the nieces and legal heirs of William J. Briscoe, and sues his widow to annul her title to the Mound *179 plantation in Tensas for die causes set in Mrs. Upshur’s suit just decided. Two other nieces of Briscoe, co-heirs with Mrs. Scott, refused to join her in the suit and are made defendants. The sales and conveyances attacked in this suit have been annulled at the instance of Mrs. Upshur, a creditor of Briscoe. Nevertheless we liave to pass upon the question raised here, whether the plaintiff, being a simple and not forced heir, can attack the acts of Briscoe by and through which his wife acquired her title. Numerous decisions confine the right of this attack to creditors and forced heirs. Druman v. Klemnan, 31 Ann. 124; Stewart v. Mix, 30 Ann. 1036; Compton v. Maxwell, 33 Ann. 688; Brown v. Stroud, 34 Ann. 374; Kerwin v. Ins Co., 35 Ann. 33. The judgment below recognised this settled rule and was in favour of the defendant, Mrs. Briscoe, rejecting the demand for annulment of her title at plaintiff’s instance, but recognised Mrs. Scott as one of the legal heirs of Briscoe with right to open his succession in form. Judgment affirmed.