Case Name: C. A. Hardy v. Wm. Irwin et. al., Administrators
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1855-09
Citations: 10 La. Ann. 703
Docket Number: 
Parties: C. A. Hardy v. Wm. Irwin et. al., Administrators.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 10
Pages: 703–703

Head Matter:
C. A. Hardy v. Wm. Irwin et. al., Administrators.
An appeal from a judgment against the administrator of a succession, will notlie in the name of an executor of the administrator, where it is not shown by the record that the executor is autorized to represent the succession against which the judgment was rendered, nor that the estate of the testator, represented by the executor, is affected by the judgment.
A PPEAL from the District Court of St. Landry, Dupre, J.
-lX MoA'tel & Hardy, for plaintiff.
B. F. Linton, for defendants and appellants.

Opinion:
Voorhies, J.
This suit was brought by the plaintiff against the defendants, William Irwin and Jane Young, as administrators of the succession of the late Frederiels, G. Kauffman, for the recovery of $431 80, alleged to be the aggregate amount of a number of claims which the plaintiff had placed in the hands of the deceased for collection. It is alleged by the plaintiff that said claims were either collected by the deceased during his life-time, or have since become extinguished by prescription, in consequence of the delay occasioned by the refusal of the.defendants to return the same.
The defendants, in their answer, denied ever having had possession of the alleged claims.
There was judgment in favor of the plaintiff, for the sum of $51, as the amount collected by the deceased during his life-time, and the defendants, on motion of their attorney, obtained in open court an order of appeal.
• The record shows that William Irwin, one of the administrators, died previous to the rendition of the judgment, and the present appeal is prosecuted in the name of Henry Irwin, as executor of the last will of said William Irwin, alone. There is neither allegation nor proof that the appellant has any authority to represent the estate of Kauffman. Neither is it shown that the estate of William Irwin is affected by the judgment appealed from.
It is, therefore, ordered, that the appeal be dismissed, at the appellant's cost.