TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Crain v. Tremont Lumber Co.

Crain v. Tremont Lumber Co., 63 So. 901 (La. 1913)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Louisiana · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 20, 1913
Docket
No. 19,767
Judges
Provosty
Citations
63 So. 901134 La. 2761913 La. LEXIS 2210
Disposition
Affirmed.
Syllabus
(Syllabubs by Editorial Staff.) 1. Guardian and Ward (§ 42*) — Minors — Sale oe Ward’s Property — Private Sale —Validity. A sale of a minor’s property at private sale, though authorized by a family meeting, is null, except when made to effect a partition. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Guardian and Ward, Cent. Dig. §§ 173-185, 191; Dec. Dig. § 42.*] 2. Guardian and Ward (§ 70*) — Invalid Sales — Ratification. The acceptance by minors, on attaining their majority, of the proceeds of a private sale by their tutor of their property does not amount to a ratification where they receive the proceeds without being informed that the proceeds were in settlement of the amount due them from their father’s estate, and without knowing that the proceeds were from the sale. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Guardian and Ward, Cent. Dig. §§ 308-315; Dec. Dig. § 70.*]
Summary
Appeal from Fifth Judicial District Court, Parish, of Winn; W. M. Wallace, Judge. Action by Lawrence O. Crain and others against the Tremont Lumber 'Company. From a judgment granting relief to plaintiffs, defendant appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Provosty

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PROVOSTY, J.

[1] In this case minors’ property was sold at private sale. Needless to say that a sale of minors’ property at private sale, even though authorized by a family meeting, is null, except when the purpose is to effect a partition. Blair v. Dwyer, 110 La. 332 , 34 South. 464 . Fletcher v. Cavalier, 4 La. 268 .

[2] The proceeds of the sale were paid by the tutor to the minors on their attaining their majority, but without further explanation than that it was in settlement of the amount due them from their father’s estate, and without their knowing that it was for the proceeds of the sale of their property; and the contention is that by receiving said paymsnt they ratified the sale. As said in the cafie of Rist v. Hartner, 44 La. Ann. 378 , 10 South. 760 :

“The ratification of a transaction which is a nullity is a recognitive and confirmative act, and cannot be successfully passed, unless it is shown to have taken place with a full knowledge of the circumstances and formal intention to cure the radical vice contaminating it, and with which it is infected, by an unreserved sanction and approval.”

That acceptance of the proceeds of a sale does not operate a ratification, unless done with full knowledge, see Rocques’ Heirs v. Leveque’s Heirs, 110 La. 307 , 34 South, 454 ; George v. Delaney, 111 La. 761 , 35 South. 894 .

Judgment affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1921: 11933: 11950: 11961: 119212026peak 1921 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Berry v. Wagner91 So. 837 (La. 1921)
  2. Prestridge v. Humble Oil & Refining Company131 So. 2d 810 (La. Ct. App. 1961)
  3. Fradella v. Pumilia147 So. 496 (La. 1933)
  4. Van Hook v. Woodard-Walker Land & Timber Corp.49 So. 2d 471 (La. Ct. App. 1950)

Most recent

  1. Prestridge v. Humble Oil & Refining Company131 So. 2d 810 (La. Ct. App. 1961)
  2. Van Hook v. Woodard-Walker Land & Timber Corp.49 So. 2d 471 (La. Ct. App. 1950)
  3. Fradella v. Pumilia147 So. 496 (La. 1933)
  4. Berry v. Wagner91 So. 837 (La. 1921)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Blair v. Dwyer, 34 So. 464 (La. 1903) 22
Rocques' Heirs v. Levecque's Heirs, 34 So. 454 (La. 1903) 9
Rist v. Hartner, 44 La. Ann. 378 (1892) 7
George v. Delaney, 35 So. 894 (La. 1904) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list