Court Opinion

ID: 9831535
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:10:17.82355+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:35.645196
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
It was said in the original opinion that the original of the present article 2472, enacted in 1840, was repealed by the Congress in 1842. We made this statement, not by consulting the acts of 1842, but upon the unchallenged statement to that effect in appellants’ brief, and upon an annotation to that effect in Vernon’s 1914 Civil Statutes, under article 2472. Appellants now call our attention to the fact that the act was not in fact repealed after its original adoption in 1840, and assumes responsibility for the error into which they were led by the annotation in question.
So the fact is that the original act was never repealed, although, as stated .in the original opinion, it was amended in 1848 by adding the words, “and made capable of inheriting his (the father’s) estate.” While it may be true, as appellant contends, that this course in the history of article 2472 tends to emphasize and support appellants’ theory that the added clause was intended as a limitation upon the inheritable capacity of the legitimated child, yet we do not think the possible intent to restrict the capacity should be construed to control the previous unqualified purpose to fully “legitimate” the offspring for whose benefit the statute was enacted.
The motion for rehearing will be overruled.