STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT
20-565
SUCCESSION OF DELQUAN DEQUINCY LOGAN
**********
APPEAL FROM THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF VERMILION, NO. 107109-L HONORABLE MARILYN CARR CASTLE, DISTRICT JUDGE
ELIZABETH A. PICKETT JUDGE
Court composed of Elizabeth A. Pickett, Shannon J. Gremillion, and Charles G. Fitzgerald, Judges.
AFFIRMED.
Kenneth H. Hooks, III H. Price Mounger, III Dodson & Hooks 112 Founders Dr. Baton Rouge, LA 70810 (225) 756-0222 COUNSEL FOR OTHER APPELLANT: Tyrone Logan
Brian C. Colomb Gordon McKernan Injury Attorneys 2505 Verot School Road Lafayette, LA 70508 (337) 541-6584 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: India Michelle Labry PICKETT, Judge.
Tyrone Logan appeals the judgment of the trial court removing him as
administrator of the succession of his deceased son, Del’Quan Logan, and
appointing India Labry, the mother of the decedent’s two minor children, as
administratrix.
FACTS
Del’Quan Logan died in a workplace accident on July 11, 2019, while
employed offshore when he fell off a barge and drowned. Del’Quan had two
young children at the time of his death. According to pleadings filed by Tyrone
Logan (hereinafter referred to a Mr. Logan), Del’Quan’s father, and India Labry,
the mother of Del’Quan’s two minor children, Del’Quan died intestate.
Mr. Logan filed a Petition for Appointment of Administrator of Succession
on August 12, 2019. The petition claimed the only property of value was a mobile
home valued at $3,500 and the Jones Act claim for personal injury that Mr. Logan
would file on behalf of his grandchildren. In the sworn detailed descriptive list
attached to the petition, Mr. Logan did not list any debts of the succession. The
trial court issued an order on August 13, 2019, appointing Mr. Logan as
administrator of the succession.
Ms. Labry filed a Motion to Remove Tyrone Logan as Administrator, and
Appoint India Labry as Independent Administratrix on August 28, 2019. Ms.
Labry alleged that as the mother and natural tutor of Del’Quan’s only heirs, she
was entitled to be appointed administratrix of the estate, and Mr. Logan was not
the proper legal representative of her and the decedent’s children. She also alleged
that Mr. Logan’s petition did not identify any grounds upon which he could be
appointed as administrator pursuant to La.Code Civ.P. art. 3097(B), which states: No person may be appointed dative testamentary executor, provisional administrator, or administrator who is not the surviving spouse, heir, legatee, legal representative of an heir or legatee, or a creditor of the deceased or a creditor of the estate of the deceased, or the nominee of the surviving spouse, heir, legatee, or legal representative of an heir or legatee of the deceased, or a co-owner of immovable property with the deceased.
In response to Ms. Labry’s motion to remove him as administrator of his
son’s estate, Mr. Logan filed an opposition on November 4, 2019, a week before
the scheduled hearing on Ms. Labry’s motion. In that opposition, he alleged for
the first time that he is a creditor of the succession. Mr. Logan introduced a proof
of claim that included the bill from the funeral home and a bill for use of a
municipal hall for a gathering after Del’Quan’s funeral. Mr. Logan alleged that
funeral expenses are a succession debt, and because he paid the funeral expenses in
excess of $13,000.00 in July, he was a creditor of the succession when he filed the
petition to be appointed administrator.
Ms. Labry introduced evidence in the form of an affidavit from Robert
Judge, a representative of Del’Quan’s employer. The affidavit stated that Mr.
Judge had paid the full costs of the funeral expenses to the funeral home. The
funeral home agreed to reimburse Mr. Logan $360, the only amount that he had
actually paid to the funeral home. Further, Mr. Judge attempted to pay Lafayette
for the rent charged for use of the reception hall owned by the city, but Lafayette
refused the payment because it had already been paid. Mr. Judge’s affidavit stated
that he would reimburse the payor of that charge. Attached to the affidavit were
copies of the checks, a receipt from the funeral home, and e-mails between Mr.
Judge and representatives of the funeral home.
The trial court held a hearing on Ms. Labry’s motion to remove Mr. Logan
on November 12, 2019. The trial court noted that it had not received a copy of Mr.
Logan’s opposition before the hearing. After hearing arguments, the trial court 2 determined that Mr. Logan’s initial petition failed to state grounds upon which he
could be appointed administrator. Thus, Ms. Labry’s pleading seeking removal of
Mr. Logan as administrator alleged valid grounds for Mr. Logan’s removal.
Finally, Mr. Logan’s eleventh-hour attempt to qualify as administrator as a creditor
failed, as Ms. Labry was appointed administratrix of the succession as
representative of her children, the decedent’s only heirs.
Mr. Logan now appeals.
ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
Mr. Logan asserts two assignments of error:
1. The trial court erred in removing Tyrone Logan as administrator of the Succession of DelQuan DeQuincy Logan.
A. The trial court erroneously placed the burden of proof on Mr. Logan to establish he was qualified as administrator at the time of his appointment and the trial court’s determination that Mr. Logan’s failure to plead his qualifications in his Petition for Appointment of Administrator made his appointment invalid and null was legal error.
B. To the extent the Petition for Appointment of Administrator was vague as to Mr. Logan’s qualifications as administrator, it was cured by evidence submitted by Mr. Logan that he was qualified to be administrator as a creditor of his son’s estate under the provisions of La.Code Civ.P. art. 3097(B).
C. Ms. Labry submitted no evidence that Mr. Logan was not qualified to be administrator at the time of his appointment nor that he had become disqualified.
2. The district court erred in appointing India Labry as independent administratrix of the Succession of Del’Quan DeQuincy Logan. Mr. Logan had already been appointed administrator and his removal was in error.
A. The order of preference in La.Code Civ.P. art. 3098 operates only where one or more persons seek to be appointed administrator of a succession. Once Mr. Logan was appointed, the preference of La.Code Civ.P. art. 3098 did not inure to Ms. Labry’s benefit.
B. The beneficiary for a Jones Act claim is irrelevant for the purposes of determining the administrator of a succession.
3 DISCUSSION
In Succession of Simon, 03-1127 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/4/04), 866 So.2d 349,
this court addressed a situation similar to this case. The decedent’s mother
qualified as the succession representative, and the decedent’s surviving spouse and
mother of the decedent’s minor child sought to remove her as administrator and
replace her. Simon, like this case, involved a decedent whose heirs had a Jones Act
claim. This court found that the party seeking to remove the appointed
administrator bore the burden of proving that the administrator was unqualified.
Though neither party introduced any evidence at the hearing in Simon, this court
found that the detailed descriptive list was prima facie proof of the contents
thereof, citing La.Code Civ.P art. 3137. Because the decedent’s mother failed to
allege any debts of the succession, and she did not allege she was an heir or the
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT
20-565
SUCCESSION OF DELQUAN DEQUINCY LOGAN
**********
APPEAL FROM THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF VERMILION, NO. 107109-L HONORABLE MARILYN CARR CASTLE, DISTRICT JUDGE
ELIZABETH A. PICKETT JUDGE
Court composed of Elizabeth A. Pickett, Shannon J. Gremillion, and Charles G. Fitzgerald, Judges.
AFFIRMED.
Kenneth H. Hooks, III H. Price Mounger, III Dodson & Hooks 112 Founders Dr. Baton Rouge, LA 70810 (225) 756-0222 COUNSEL FOR OTHER APPELLANT: Tyrone Logan
Brian C. Colomb Gordon McKernan Injury Attorneys 2505 Verot School Road Lafayette, LA 70508 (337) 541-6584 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: India Michelle Labry PICKETT, Judge.
Tyrone Logan appeals the judgment of the trial court removing him as
administrator of the succession of his deceased son, Del’Quan Logan, and
appointing India Labry, the mother of the decedent’s two minor children, as
administratrix.
FACTS
Del’Quan Logan died in a workplace accident on July 11, 2019, while
employed offshore when he fell off a barge and drowned. Del’Quan had two
young children at the time of his death. According to pleadings filed by Tyrone
Logan (hereinafter referred to a Mr. Logan), Del’Quan’s father, and India Labry,
the mother of Del’Quan’s two minor children, Del’Quan died intestate.
Mr. Logan filed a Petition for Appointment of Administrator of Succession
on August 12, 2019. The petition claimed the only property of value was a mobile
home valued at $3,500 and the Jones Act claim for personal injury that Mr. Logan
would file on behalf of his grandchildren. In the sworn detailed descriptive list
attached to the petition, Mr. Logan did not list any debts of the succession. The
trial court issued an order on August 13, 2019, appointing Mr. Logan as
administrator of the succession.
Ms. Labry filed a Motion to Remove Tyrone Logan as Administrator, and
Appoint India Labry as Independent Administratrix on August 28, 2019. Ms.
Labry alleged that as the mother and natural tutor of Del’Quan’s only heirs, she
was entitled to be appointed administratrix of the estate, and Mr. Logan was not
the proper legal representative of her and the decedent’s children. She also alleged
that Mr. Logan’s petition did not identify any grounds upon which he could be
appointed as administrator pursuant to La.Code Civ.P. art. 3097(B), which states: No person may be appointed dative testamentary executor, provisional administrator, or administrator who is not the surviving spouse, heir, legatee, legal representative of an heir or legatee, or a creditor of the deceased or a creditor of the estate of the deceased, or the nominee of the surviving spouse, heir, legatee, or legal representative of an heir or legatee of the deceased, or a co-owner of immovable property with the deceased.
In response to Ms. Labry’s motion to remove him as administrator of his
son’s estate, Mr. Logan filed an opposition on November 4, 2019, a week before
the scheduled hearing on Ms. Labry’s motion. In that opposition, he alleged for
the first time that he is a creditor of the succession. Mr. Logan introduced a proof
of claim that included the bill from the funeral home and a bill for use of a
municipal hall for a gathering after Del’Quan’s funeral. Mr. Logan alleged that
funeral expenses are a succession debt, and because he paid the funeral expenses in
excess of $13,000.00 in July, he was a creditor of the succession when he filed the
petition to be appointed administrator.
Ms. Labry introduced evidence in the form of an affidavit from Robert
Judge, a representative of Del’Quan’s employer. The affidavit stated that Mr.
Judge had paid the full costs of the funeral expenses to the funeral home. The
funeral home agreed to reimburse Mr. Logan $360, the only amount that he had
actually paid to the funeral home. Further, Mr. Judge attempted to pay Lafayette
for the rent charged for use of the reception hall owned by the city, but Lafayette
refused the payment because it had already been paid. Mr. Judge’s affidavit stated
that he would reimburse the payor of that charge. Attached to the affidavit were
copies of the checks, a receipt from the funeral home, and e-mails between Mr.
Judge and representatives of the funeral home.
The trial court held a hearing on Ms. Labry’s motion to remove Mr. Logan
on November 12, 2019. The trial court noted that it had not received a copy of Mr.
Logan’s opposition before the hearing. After hearing arguments, the trial court 2 determined that Mr. Logan’s initial petition failed to state grounds upon which he
could be appointed administrator. Thus, Ms. Labry’s pleading seeking removal of
Mr. Logan as administrator alleged valid grounds for Mr. Logan’s removal.
Finally, Mr. Logan’s eleventh-hour attempt to qualify as administrator as a creditor
failed, as Ms. Labry was appointed administratrix of the succession as
representative of her children, the decedent’s only heirs.
Mr. Logan now appeals.
ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
Mr. Logan asserts two assignments of error:
1. The trial court erred in removing Tyrone Logan as administrator of the Succession of DelQuan DeQuincy Logan.
A. The trial court erroneously placed the burden of proof on Mr. Logan to establish he was qualified as administrator at the time of his appointment and the trial court’s determination that Mr. Logan’s failure to plead his qualifications in his Petition for Appointment of Administrator made his appointment invalid and null was legal error.
B. To the extent the Petition for Appointment of Administrator was vague as to Mr. Logan’s qualifications as administrator, it was cured by evidence submitted by Mr. Logan that he was qualified to be administrator as a creditor of his son’s estate under the provisions of La.Code Civ.P. art. 3097(B).
C. Ms. Labry submitted no evidence that Mr. Logan was not qualified to be administrator at the time of his appointment nor that he had become disqualified.
2. The district court erred in appointing India Labry as independent administratrix of the Succession of Del’Quan DeQuincy Logan. Mr. Logan had already been appointed administrator and his removal was in error.
A. The order of preference in La.Code Civ.P. art. 3098 operates only where one or more persons seek to be appointed administrator of a succession. Once Mr. Logan was appointed, the preference of La.Code Civ.P. art. 3098 did not inure to Ms. Labry’s benefit.
B. The beneficiary for a Jones Act claim is irrelevant for the purposes of determining the administrator of a succession.
3 DISCUSSION
In Succession of Simon, 03-1127 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/4/04), 866 So.2d 349,
this court addressed a situation similar to this case. The decedent’s mother
qualified as the succession representative, and the decedent’s surviving spouse and
mother of the decedent’s minor child sought to remove her as administrator and
replace her. Simon, like this case, involved a decedent whose heirs had a Jones Act
claim. This court found that the party seeking to remove the appointed
administrator bore the burden of proving that the administrator was unqualified.
Though neither party introduced any evidence at the hearing in Simon, this court
found that the detailed descriptive list was prima facie proof of the contents
thereof, citing La.Code Civ.P art. 3137. Because the decedent’s mother failed to
allege any debts of the succession, and she did not allege she was an heir or the
representative of an heir, the court found the trial court properly removed the
mother as administratrix.
In the case before us, Ms. Labry introduced evidence that she, not Mr.
Logan, was the legal representative of her children as their natural tutor. Thus, she
proved that the only stated ground in Mr. Logan’s petition to be appointed
administrator was not valid, and he had no grounds to be appointed administrator.
Therefore, Ms. Labry was the first person to file a valid claim to be appointed
administrator pursuant to La.Code Civ.P. art. 3097(B). The burden of proof then
shifted to Mr. Logan to show that he was entitled to remain as administrator. The
trial court found that Mr. Logan’s alleged status as creditor was irrelevant since it
was not pled in his original pleadings, and by the time of the hearing it appeared
that all the debts he alleged the succession owed him had been paid.
We find no error in the trial court’s judgment. Ms. Labry, as personal
representative of the heirs of the succession, proved that Mr. Logan was not 4 qualified to serve as administrator. She further showed that she was qualified to
serve as administrator of the succession. The judgment of the trial court is
CONCLUSION
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Costs of this appeal are assessed
to Mr. Logan.