Legal Opinion

Mackin v. Wilds

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided November 15, 1901No. 13,946Published

APPEAL from the Tenth Judicial District, Parish of Concordia— Dagg, J.

1Opinion

On the Merits.

One of the parties litigant in the suit for partition was a minor. As to him there could be no consent decree ordering the partition of the property by licitation — certainly so in the absence of the advice of a family meeting, duly homologated, recommending this course.

The property in question was not indivisible by its nature. The law, where minors are concerned, favors the partition of property in kind, and O. C. 1339 expressly lays it down that there must be proof before the judge that it is indivisible by its nature, or else that it cannot be conveniently divided in kind,…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Harrison v. SoulabereSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1900
  2. Succession of DumestreSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1888
  3. Succession of Gassen v. PalfreySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1854

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API