In re Seghers

Supreme Court of Louisiana

In re Seghers

10 La. Ann. 423

DecidedJune 15, 1855

StatusPublished

This text of 10 La. Ann. 423 (In re Seghers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Seghers, 10 La. Ann. 423 (La. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

Slidell, C. J.

This is an appeal from the refusal of the District Judge to homologate the proceedings of a family meeting, and to decree the emancipation of the minors. The reasons for his refusal are fully and forcibly stated by the District Judge, and his conclusion meets our concurrence. We cannot recognize the doctrine that in a proceeding under the Statute of 1847, where the family meeting has not given a Satisfactory detail of the causes which make the emancipation necessary or desirable, and where the Judge is left wholly uninformed as to the situation, nature and amount of the minor’s property, he is to be considered a mere automaton, to sign an homologation, stripped of any judicial discretion, and excluded from enquiring whether according to the evidence before him and his conscientious conviction, the welfare of the minor will be proa oted by the decree.

Judgment affirmed, costs to be paid by appellant.

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

Slidell, C. J.

This is an appeal from the refusal of the District Judge to homologate the proceedings of a family meeting, and to decree the emancipation of the minors. The reasons for his refusal are fully and forcibly stated by the District Judge, and his conclusion meets our concurrence. We cannot recognize the doctrine that in a proceeding under the Statute of 1847, where the family meeting has not given a Satisfactory detail of the causes which make the emancipation necessary or desirable, and where the Judge is left wholly uninformed as to the situation, nature and amount of the minor’s property, he is to be considered a mere automaton, to sign an homologation, stripped of any judicial discretion, and excluded from enquiring whether according to the evidence before him and his conscientious conviction, the welfare of the minor will be proa oted by the decree.

Judgment affirmed, costs to be paid by appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 La. Ann. 423, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-seghers-la-1855.