Court Opinion

ID: 9674457
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:29:02.674064+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:27.735946
License: Public Domain

FOURNET, Chief Justice
(concurring).
Under the express provisions of the Revised Civil Code, Section 7 of Chapter 6 of Title II, under the heading “General Rules for the interpretation of Legacies,” it is specifically provided that “In the interpretation of acts of last will, the intention of the ■testator must principally be endeavored to be ascertained, without departing, however, from the proper signification of the terms of the testament.” Article 1712. “A disposition must be understood in the sense in which it can have effect, rather than that in which it can have none” (Article 1713), .and, “When, from the terms made use of by the testator, his intention can not be ascertained, recourse must be had to all circumstances which may aid in the discovery of his intention.” Article 1715.
■ Adhering to these cardinal rules laid .down for our guidance, I believe that from the terms of the testament the interpretation placed by the majority on the bequest in controversy not only gives it a meaning in which it can have effect, but reasonably conforms with the intention of the testator.