Skip to main content
· 1/7/1907

Succession of Dielmann

Citations

  • 119 La. 101
  • 43 So. 972
  • 1907 La. LEXIS 440

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeal — Proceedings fob Transfer of Cause — Order of Appeal.</p> <p>The motion to dismiss the appeal is not sustained.</p> <p>There was an order of appeal fixing the amount of the bond of appeal.</p> <p>A certified copy of this order was filed in due time.</p> <p>2. Husband and Wife — Community Property-Rights of Survivor.</p> <p>A widow in community ruled the liquidators of a bank to show cause why they should not turn over to her, as usufructuary, certain funds in their hands representing proceeds of stock which had been converted into money by the liquidation of the bank. The heirs were made parties, as was also the husband of one of the heirs who had died, leaving him as her universal legatee.</p> <p>The rule was resisted by several of the defendants. It was claimed that the widow must furnish security under article 558 of the Civil Code, and, failing to do so, the fund must be invested in other bonds or stock under articles 563 and 564 of the Civil Code.</p> <p>The widow had withdrawn a portion of the funds before the issuing of the rule. She had also acquired the right, title, and interest of several of the heirs. It was claimed that, by receiving and using those funds in the purchase of the shares of certain heirs, she had renounced and extinguished her usufruct, and had thrown herself into relations of joint ownership with the respondents, which entitled them to a partition ; that the purchase by the widow of these shares was really to that extent a partition between herself and the vendors of the shares as favored children, excluding respondents from the benefit of a like partition.</p> <p>Held, the provisions of article 558, as to the furnishing of security by the usufructuary, do not refer to the usufruct of the surviving spouse under the usufruct laws of 1844. The usufructuary takes that usufruct without the obligation of giving security. The exemption from giving security extends over the entire share of the deceased, including moneys then on han

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “The Court will not defer to USCIS’s briefing because it ‘appears to be nothing 27 more than an agency’s convenient litigating position.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Breaux, Nicholls

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.