Court Opinion

ID: 9694057
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 17:19:38.831203+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:54.805322
License: Public Domain

*1014On Applications for Rehearing
PER CURIAM..
Both sides have applied for a rehearing in this case.
In the ruling made in the opinion herein handed down, it is stated that concerning the demand made as to the last will of and the donation made by Elvena Andrus, “Unless the proponents of the will of Elvena Andrus can support the disinherison clause it contains, plaintiffs and the intervenors who have joined them have a cause of action to have the bequests made therein reduced to the disposable portion allowed by law.”
We had previously shown in the opinion, in stating-the case, that the plaintiffs had alleged that even though the disinherison clause in the will of Elvena Andrus respecting both Willy and Jean Baptiste Andrus should not be invalid, that the provisions, in so far as it disinherited Jean Baptiste Andrus, can have no effect against Mary Andrus and his other children, since Elvena Andrus died after he did.
By inadvertence we failed to state anything in the opinion concerning this allegation which we found is supported by Article 901 of the LSA-Civil Code which provides:
“When a person has been disinherited by his father or mother, or excluded from his succession for unworthiness, his children can not represent him in the succession of their grandfather or other ascendants, if he is alive at the time of the opening of the succession, but they can represent him if he died before.” :
It follows therefore that that part of our ruling which, in effect, would have required the children of Jean Baptiste Andrus to refute proof of the facts supporting the disinherison clause in the will of Elvena Andrus, if any, was in error and the ruling is amended to the extent that plaintiff Mary Andrus and the intervenors are no longer concerned with the disinherison clause in their grandmother’s will in so far as it relates to their father and as to them there is a cause of action regardless of such clause.
We have given due consideration to all the other. contentions made in both applications and finding no merit in any of them, both will be denied.
Rehearings refused.