City of New Orleans v. Mangiarisina

71 So. 886, 139 La. 605, 1916 La. LEXIS 1594
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedApril 24, 1916
DocketNo. 21879
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 71 So. 886 (City of New Orleans v. Mangiarisina) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of New Orleans v. Mangiarisina, 71 So. 886, 139 La. 605, 1916 La. LEXIS 1594 (La. 1916).

Opinion

PROVOSTY,' J.

The accused was prosecuted before the Second recorder’s court for violation of the following ordinance:

An Ordinance Defining Rat-Proofing of All Buildings.

An ordinance to better protect the public health, and particularly to prevent the introduction and spread of bubonic plague, by providing for the rat-proofing of all buildings, outhouses and other superstructures, stables, lots, open areas and other premises, sidewalks, streets and alleys in the city of New Orleans.
Whereas, during the month of June, 1914, the bubonic plague made its appearance in the city of New Orleans, and thereby threatened the health and lives of the people through the ravages of the dread disease, and menaced the prosperity of the entire community through the imminence of destructive quarantines ; and,
Whereas, the city government and the state and city health authorities, in earnest effort to avert the calamities aforesaid, solicited and secured the co-operation and active assistance of the United States Public Health Service in dealing with the crisis impending; and,
Whereas, the board of health of the parish of Orleans and the city of New Orleans, with the concurrence and advice of the United States Health authorities, enacted certain ordinances designated to eradicate and prevent both rodent and human infection from the said bubonic plague, among which said ordinances were Ordinances Nos. 17 and 21 of the board of health series; and,
Whereas, the honorable Supreme Court of the state of Louisiana has, in the case of the city of New Orleans versus Miss M. Sanford et al., held that the said ordinances, although under the stringent circumstances of the case justified and necessary, yet solely because of a certain detail of discretionary executive authority vested thereby in the city health officer, and which authority it is admitted in the opinion of said court has not been by said officer improperly or oppressively exercised, they held, the said ordinances were unconstitutional, and hence null and void ; and,
Whereas, the work of the authorities under the health ordinances aforesaid has, up to the present time, entirely averted the disastrous menace of the plague, still the said work is by no means finished, nor is the menace of infection and the spread of the disease finally eliminated ; and,
Whereas, abandonment of the work under said ordinances or delay in the prosecution thereof is fraught with grave danger to the health of the people and the commercial prosperity of the community, the commission council of the city of New Orleans is not only constrained by the dictates of prudence, but feels in solemn duty bound to re-enact in the legal form prescribed by the honorable Supreme Court the said health ordinances which the said court has held are, in purpose, both justifiable and necessary. Now/ therefore:
Section 1. Be it ordained by the commission council of the city of New Orleans, that from and after the promulgation of this ordinance that every building, outhouse and other superstructure, stable, lot, open area and other premise, sidewalk, street and alley, now constructed, or hereafter to be constructed in the city of New Orleans, shall be rat-proofed in the manner hereinafter provided for.
Sec. 2. Be it further ordained, etc., that it shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to have or maintain, or hereafter to construct any building, outhouse or other superstructure, stable, lot, open area or other premise, sidewalk, street or alley within the city of New Orleans, unless the same shall be rat-proofed in the manner hereinafter provided for.
Sec. 3. Be it further ordained, etc., that for the purpose of rat-proofing, all buildings, outhouses and other superstructures in the city of New Orleans, except stables, shall be divided into three classes, to wit: Class A, Class B and Class C; and the same shall’ be rat-proofed in the manner following, to wit:
Class A — All buildings, outhouses and other superstructures of class A shall have floors made of concrete, which concrete shall be not less than three (3) inches thick, and overlaid with a top dressing of cement, mosaic tiling, or other impermeable material, laid in cement mortal-, and such floor shall rest without any intervening space .between, upon the ground, or upon filling of clean earth, sand, cinders, broken stone or brick, gravel or similar material, which filling shall be free from animal or vegetable substances; said floor shall extend, and be hermetically sealed, to walls surrounding said floor, which walls shall’ be made of concrete, stone or brick, laid in cement mortar, and each wall to be not less than six (6) inches thick, and shall extend into and below the surface of the surrounding ground at least two (2) feet, and shall extend not less than one (1) foot above the surface of said floor; provided that wooden removable gratings may be laid on such concrete floors in such parts of such buildings,, superstructures and outhouses as are used exclusively as sales departments.
Class B — All buildings, outhouses and other superstructures of class B shall be set upon pillars or underpinning of concrete, stone or brick, laid in cement mortar, such pillars or underpinning to be not less than eighteen (18) inches high, the height to be measured from the ground level to the top of said pillars or underpinning ; and the intervening space between said building and the ground level to be open on three (3) sides, and to be free from all rubbish and other rat-harboring material, or may be made rat-proof by constructing at the margin of the ground area of said building a wall of [610]*610concrete or brick or stone laid in cement; such wall to extend into and below the surface of the ground at least two (2) feet and to meet the floor of the building above closely and without any intervening space, such walls shall be at least six (6) inches thick and extend entirely around said building; provided that said walls may be built with openings therein for ventilation only, and provided further, that such openings for ventilation may be of such size as the owner may elect and shall be securely screened with metallic gratings having openings between the bars of said gratings of not more than one-half inch, or with wire mesh of not less than twelve gauge, having openings between the wires of said mesh of not more than one-half inch, and the whole so constructed and closed as to prevent the entrance of rats beneath such building.
Class C — All buildings, outhouses and other superstructures of class C shall be rat-proofed as provided in class A except that tar-cinder composition flooring, as hereinafter defined and provided for, may be substituted for the concrete floors provided for in class A. That tar-cinder flooring hereinabove provided for, is hereby defined to be a composition of cinders and coal tar only, and, when laid, to be covered by a wooden floor.
The cinders used in the composition shall be free of soft ash and clinkers and shall be brought to the work dry.
The coal tar used in the composition shall be the product of the dry distillation of coal, and shall contain not more than two (2) per cent of water, and shall be free from any mixture with other substance or thing.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

City of Baton Rouge v. Cooley
418 So. 2d 1321 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1982)
Doll v. Flintkote Co.
91 So. 2d 24 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1956)
Commonwealth v. DiStasio
8 N.E.2d 923 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1937)
State v. Egli
238 P. 514 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1925)
City of New Orleans v. Gilmore
72 So. 706 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
71 So. 886, 139 La. 605, 1916 La. LEXIS 1594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-new-orleans-v-mangiarisina-la-1916.