| La. | Mar 15, 1840
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is am action instituted by the legal heirs of one Alexander Verdun, for the purpose of annulling a certain instrument, purporting to be his last will and testament, made in the form of a-nuncupative testament, by public act. Several grounds are alleged in the petition, for which the plaintiffs contend that the testament ought to be declared null and void, and among others, that it does not appear that the testament was dictated by the testator, that it was written by the notary ; and that no mention is made, that it was written by the notary as it was dictated by the testator. The parts of the will relative to the legal formalities, are as follows :
gilité des choses humaines et de la vie, et voulant en outre mettre ordre U ses affaires en cas que son creatéur le rappéle h lui “ Pardevant, fyc., est comparu, fyc. Lequel etant sain de corps et d’esprit ainsi qu’il nous a paru mais bien persuadí de la fradeclare en presence des sieurs Joseph Délaporte et Auguste H. ‡ 1 * ° Verret et Henry C. Thibodeaux témoins domicilies et requis U ce^e effeh son testament et act de derni'ere volanté, ainsi qu’il suit; savoir.” And, at the close : “ Ce testament en tí été dicté a moi dit juge en préseme des témoins ci-dessus nommés soussignés et l’ayant lu au testateur tt haute et intelligible voix en préseme ges y^es témoins il tt déclaré parfaitement comprendre et y persé- * J r a r vérer. En foi de quoi le dit compar ant a signé, fyc.”
It is perfectly clear, that the will attacked in this suit is not clothed with the legal formalities necessary to make it valid ; it contains no mention of its having been dictated by the testator to and written by the notary, and written by the notary as dictated by the testator. We are, therefore, of opinion, that the district judge did not erf in invalidating said will, as it suffices that if a testament be defective in one of the legal requisites to be invalidated,.it becomes unnecessary to examine the other grounds of nullity.
gu| it is contended, that if this testament be null as a . ' nuncupative will by public act, it is good as one under private signature. It is true, that this last kind of testaments are not su'3ject to the same strictness of formality as those by public act; and that it. does not matter whether the testator
We think that the testament of A. Verdun, is also void as a nuncupative will under private signature, and that the district judge did not err in giving judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed, with costs.