Case Name: Succession of WATT
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1903-03-02
Citations: 111 La. 937
Docket Number: No. 14,711
Parties: Succession of WATT.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 111
Pages: 937–939

Head Matter:
(36 South. 31.)
No. 14,711.
Succession of WATT.
(March 2, 1903.)
SUSPENSIVE APPEAL—TUTORSHIP—DUTIES OE FATHER.
On Motion to Dismiss.
1. An appeal from a judgment revoking an order appointing a tutor and appointing a special tutor in place of him whose appointment is thus vacated, will he dismissed as a suspensive, and maintained as a devolutive, appeal.
On the Merits.
2. The father cannot he excused from the obligation of accepting the tutorship of his own children. Oiv. Code, art. 301. He cannot abdicate his tutorship, and permit another person to be appointed tutor. Such an appointment is null. James v. Meyer, 7 South. 618, 41 La. Ann. 1103.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans; George H. Théard, Judge.
In the matter of the succession of Harriet L. Watt. From a judgment revoking an order appointing a tutor, defendants in rule appeal.
Affirmed.
Clegg & Quintero and Norton Roger Roberts, for appellants. Pierre Grabites, special tutor and curator ad hoc, for appellees Wheeler. Gus. J. Rieau, special tutor and curator ad hoc, for appellees Howcott.

Opinion:
On Motion to Dismiss Suspensive Appeal.
MONROE, J.
This case is before the court on a motion to dismiss the "suspensive appeal" from a judgment revoking an order appointing a tutor to certain minors, ánd making an appointment of a special tutor .in place of him whose appointment was 'thus, vacated. It is admitted, on behalf of the appellant that, "when an appeal is taken from a judgment appointing or removing a tutor, such appeal does not suspend the execution 6f the judgment," but it is asserted that the appeal should be sustained as a devolutive appeal. <
There "seems to be no difference of opinion between the counsel upon the question presented, and there is none between the counsel and the, court. The appeal taken should not be allowed to suspend the execution of the judgment. Code Prac. arts. 580, 1059; State ex rel. Commagere v. Judge, 22 La. Ann. 116; Succession of Townsend, 37 La. Ann. 409. But it may be maintained as a devolutive appeal. Succession of Keller, 39 La. Ann. 579, 2 South. 553; Michenor et al., Trustees, v. Reinach, 49 La. Ann. 361, 21 South. 552; Weil v. Schwartz, 51 La. Ann. 1547; 26 South. 475.
It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the appeal herein be dismissed as a suspensive, and maintained as a devolutive, appeal.