Opinion
No. 2020-C-00738
09-23-2020
SUCCESSION OF Charles B. FANZ, Jr.
Writ application denied.
Crichton, J., would grant in part and deny in part for reasons assigned by Justice Genovese.
Genovese, J., would grant in part and deny in part and assigns reasons.
Genovese, J., would grant in part for the following reasons:
The majority has opted to deny these consolidated writs. Notwithstanding this Court's ruling on the validity of the donation, I agree with a denial of the remainder of these consolidated writs. However, I disagree with the result nullifying the donation in this matter.
The donation herein was an authentic act. An authentic act is full proof of the agreement and its intent. The donation herein transferred the property when the authentic act was executed in proper form and was accepted by the donee in the same authentic act, as was done in this case. A completed donation can only be revoked or dissolved for the reasons set forth in Louisiana Civil Code Article 1556. None of these reasons exits herein. There is no dispute that the donation satisfied all of the formalities associated with authentic acts. It is a valid donation by authentic act. The fact that it was not recorded is of no consequence. Regardless of the reason for not recording the donation, lack of recordation cannot affect the validity of a transfer nor render it a simulation. The sanctity of an authentic act must be preserved.
I would reverse the lower courts’ nullification of the donation and find the donation to be valid. I deny all other aspects of these consolidated writs.