Opinion ID: 1827668
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Were the Donations Validly Accepted by the Donees?

Text: To be binding, a donation must be accepted in precise terms by the donee according to LSA-C.C. art. 1540, as follows: A donation inter vivos shall be binding on the donor, and shall produce effect only from the day of its being accepted in precise terms. The acceptance may be made during the lifetime of the donor by a posterior and authentic act, but in that case the donation shall have the effect, with regard to the donor, only from the day of his being notified of the act establishing that acceptance. Here, the Brasseauxs signed instruments in the presence of two witnesses and a notary public, which stated: ... the Donees accept the donations as made to them with love and gratitude.... Virtually identical language was held to constitute a valid acceptance under LSA-C.C. art. 1540 in Rutherford v. Rutherford, 346 So.2d 669 (La., 1977). The only real acceptance question relates to the December, 1977, donation which was signed on December 29 by the Brasseauxs but dated the next day when the Tweedels affixed their signatures. The instruments were then recorded in two parishes, giving notice to the donors and to the world that the donations had been made and accepted. See Rutherford, supra. The donees' signatures of acceptance were on the acts of donation and manifest to the Tweedels, who signed on the same page. Thus, the minor discrepancy was known to all the parties at the time. The fact that the donees' signatures were affixed the preceding day is of little significance. There is no legal provision or jurisprudence which reprobates the idea of donees signing an acceptance immediately prior to a donation. Acceptance in precise terms contained in the same act as a donation is valid, even though signed prior to the time the act is signed by the donors. [11]