Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Schreiber v. Beer's Widow & Heirs
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Decided January 2, 1922No. 23188Published
Appeal from Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans; Porter Parker, Judge. • Suit by Mrs. Jeanne C. L. Schreiber against the widow and heirs of Ferdinand Beer to revive a judgment against the succession and to obtain a judgment against the widow and heirs individually for the debt represented by the judgment. Suit dismissed .on an exception of no cause of action, and plaintiff appeals.
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
MONROE, O. J.
(concurring in decree, but dissenting from certain passages in the opinion handed down). I concur in the decree in this case, but dissent from the statement in the opinion referring to the cases of Generes v. Bowie Lumber Co., 143 La. 811, 79 South. 413, and Bendernagel v. Foret, 145 La. 115, 81 South. 869, which reads:
“It was not held, in either of those cases, that an heir who had not renounced the succession was, within the period of 30 years, presumed to have accepted, and might be held liable personally for a debt of the deceased, without having been proceeded against by the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bendernagel v. ForetSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1919
- Generes v. Bowie Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1918
- Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. v. DresserSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1919