Succession of Buck

| FITZSIMMONS, Judge,

concurring with reasons.

I respectfully concur in the result reached by the majority. This court has understandably found itself under the penumbra of jurisprudential precedent established in Spiller v. Herpel, 357 So.2d 572 (La.App. 1st Cir.), writ denied, 358 So.2d 637 (La.1978). However, adherence to the corrosive application of “lapsed legacy,” in instances such as Spiller and the instant case, abrogates the intent and written directives of the testator. Indeed, the harsh result of bestowing on the curator the sole discretion to alter a special bequest of the testator,…