Marshall v. Pearce
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Twelfth Judicial District Court, Parish of Rapides. Harbin, J. The will contains a substitution, for the following reasons: 1. Because it is drawn in the exact language of the entail of the common law and the substitutions limited by the ordinance of 1747, and prohibited by the Code Napoleon, Kent, Yol. 4, pages 20 and 21, and what was an entail or substitution then, must be one now. 2. Because the devise of the movables is not included is the devise to…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Twelfth Judicial District Court, Parish of Rapides. Harbin, J. The will contains a substitution, for the following reasons: 1. Because it is drawn in the exact language of the entail of the common law and the substitutions limited by the ordinance of 1747, and prohibited by the Code Napoleon, Kent, Yol. 4, pages 20 and 21, and what was an entail or substitution then, must be one now. 2. Because the devise of the movables is not included is the devise to Joshua Pearce, but is to Mrs. Pearce in absolute ownership; but they are devised to Mrs. Pearce by the same clause by whieh…
1Opinion of the Court
Tlie opinion of the Court was delivered by
Fenner, J.
This is a suit by two of the children and forced heirs, to annul the following will of Joshua Pearce, as containing a prohibited substitution:
*558“ First. I give and bequeath unto my beloved wife, Sarah H. Pearce, the upper part of my plantation upon which I reside, situated on Rayon Boeuf, in the Parish of Rapides, containing one hundred acres, four acres front and twenty-five acres deep, running parallel with the plantation of W. J. S. Johnson, together with all the improvements and movables thereon, to home and to hold during her natural…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wise v. WalkerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
- State v. Inhabitants of TrentonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1888