Harris v. Hernandez

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Harris v. Hernandez

517 So. 2d 287, 1987 La. App. LEXIS 10673, 1987 WL 1487

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 10, 1987

DocketNo. CA 86 1329

StatusPublished

This text of 517 So. 2d 287 (Harris v. Hernandez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harris v. Hernandez, 517 So. 2d 287, 1987 La. App. LEXIS 10673, 1987 WL 1487 (La. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

CHIASSON, Judge.

Robert Aikens died on July 31, 1980, in Ascension Parish, where he was domiciled. The defendants-appellants in the instant suit, claiming to be the children of the decedent, obtained an ex parte judgment of possession placing them in possession of the property left by Aikens. Plaintiffs-ap-pellees, Betsy York and Hilda Harbor Howard, claiming to be the sister and niece of Aikens, filed a petition to annul the ex parte judgment. After trial on the merits, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, declaring the ex parte proceedings to be null and void and ordering the clerk of court to make the proper notations in the records. Defendants have appealed.

Appellants contend that the trial court erred in finding that defendants were not the descendants and heirs of Robert Ai-kens.

LSA-C.C. art. 209(B) provides that:

A child not entitled to legitimate filiation nor filiated by the initiative of the parent by legitimation or by acknowledgment under Article 203 must prove filiation as to an alleged deceased parent by clear and convincing evidence in a civil proceeding instituted by the child or on his behalf within the time limit provided in this Article.

The evidence clearly establishes that appellants are not entitled to claim legitimate filiation to decedent nor were they filiated by legitimation or by acknowledgment under. C.C. art. 203. Further, no civil proceeding was ever instituted by the appellants.

Appellants claimed only that they were informally acknowledged by decedent. They are therefore required to prove filiation under C.C. art. 209 before they can petition for possession of the estate. Succession of Alexander, 460 So.2d 19 (La.App. 1st Cir.1984) writ denied, 462 So.2d 652 (La.1985).

Under these facts the trial judge was eminently correct in declaring the ex parte judgment of possession null and void.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed at appellants’ costs.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CHIASSON, Judge.

Robert Aikens died on July 31, 1980, in Ascension Parish, where he was domiciled. The defendants-appellants in the instant suit, claiming to be the children of the decedent, obtained an ex parte judgment of possession placing them in possession of the property left by Aikens. Plaintiffs-ap-pellees, Betsy York and Hilda Harbor Howard, claiming to be the sister and niece of Aikens, filed a petition to annul the ex parte judgment. After trial on the merits, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, declaring the ex parte proceedings to be null and void and ordering the clerk of court to make the proper notations in the records. Defendants have appealed.

Appellants contend that the trial court erred in finding that defendants were not the descendants and heirs of Robert Ai-kens.

LSA-C.C. art. 209(B) provides that:

A child not entitled to legitimate filiation nor filiated by the initiative of the parent by legitimation or by acknowledgment under Article 203 must prove filiation as to an alleged deceased parent by clear and convincing evidence in a civil proceeding instituted by the child or on his behalf within the time limit provided in this Article.

The evidence clearly establishes that appellants are not entitled to claim legitimate filiation to decedent nor were they filiated by legitimation or by acknowledgment under. C.C. art. 203. Further, no civil proceeding was ever instituted by the appellants.

Appellants claimed only that they were informally acknowledged by decedent. They are therefore required to prove filiation under C.C. art. 209 before they can petition for possession of the estate. Succession of Alexander, 460 So.2d 19 (La.App. 1st Cir.1984) writ denied, 462 So.2d 652 (La.1985).

Under these facts the trial judge was eminently correct in declaring the ex parte judgment of possession null and void.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed at appellants’ costs.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

517 So. 2d 287, 1987 La. App. LEXIS 10673, 1987 WL 1487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-hernandez-lactapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack