Culligan v. Martin

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Culligan v. Martin

267 So. 2d 208, 263 La. 98, 1972 La. LEXIS 5314

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided October 17, 1972·No. No. 52898·Published

Opinion

Writ refused. This Court will not exercise its supervisory jurisdiction when due to the element of time, any judgment which [100] might be rendered could not become effective to afford relator the relief sought.

DIXON, J.,

is of the opinion that the time element does not prevent the consideration of the issues; ballots have not been printed, except for absentee ballots. Downs v. Pharis, 240 La. 580, 124 So.2d 553, is probably in error, and, if so, should be reversed.

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

Writ refused. This Court will not exercise its supervisory jurisdiction when due to the element of time, any judgment which [100] might be rendered could not become effective to afford relator the relief sought.

DIXON, J.,

is of the opinion that the time element does not prevent the consideration of the issues; ballots have not been printed, except for absentee ballots. Downs v. Pharis, 240 La. 580, 124 So.2d 553, is probably in error, and, if so, should be reversed.

Culligan v. Martin, 267 So. 2d 208, 263 La. 98, 1972 La. LEXIS 5314 (La. 1972).

Pincite

267 So. 2d 208 (Culligan v. Martin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related