JEFFERSON PAR. SCH. BD. v. Jefferson Par. Dem. Ex. Com.

163 So. 2d 348, 246 La. 51
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedApril 17, 1964
Docket47194
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 163 So. 2d 348 (JEFFERSON PAR. SCH. BD. v. Jefferson Par. Dem. Ex. Com.) 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
JEFFERSON PAR. SCH. BD. v. Jefferson Par. Dem. Ex. Com., 163 So. 2d 348, 246 La. 51 (La. 1964).

Opinion

163 So.2d 348 (1964)
246 La. 51

JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL BOARD et al.
v.
JEFFERSON PARISH DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE et al.

No. 47194.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 17, 1964.

Dean A. Andrews, Jr., New Orleans, Benjamin J. Trombatore, Kenner, David Treen, New Orleans, Jack P. F. Gremillion, *349 Atty. Gen., Weldon Cousins, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frank Langridge, Dist. Atty., for defendants-appellants.

Nathan Greenberg, Gilbert P. Cohen, Gretna, for defendants-appellees.

HAMLIN, Justice.

In this declaratory judgment proceeding (LSA-C.C.P. Arts. 1871-1883), plaintiffs prayed for judgment decreeing that Act 85 of 1960,[1] particularly LSA-R.S. *350 17:60(A), (B), (C), (E), (F), and (G), is unconstitutional and ineffective. They further prayed that the Jefferson Parish Democratic Executive Committee be ordered to call such elections as may be necessary for the Jefferson Parish School Board pursuant to the terms of the general school laws of the State of Louisiana, without regard to the provisions of Act 85 of 1960. They still further prayed for judgment decreeing that the Jefferson Parish School Board is governed by the general school laws of the State of Louisiana with regard to the holding of regular meetings, dual office holding of its members, and endorsement of a candidate for the school board, without regard to the provisions of Act 85 of 1960.

In their answer, the Jefferson Parish Democratic Executive Committee and its members averred that a real, substantial, and actual controversy existed in connection with the subject matter, and that the matter was justiciable and was a proper subject for declaratory relief. The defendants specifically averred that until such time as the court decided the matters raised, the administration of the Public School System of the Parish of Jefferson was in danger. They further averred that it was in the best interest of the Democratic Party of the Parish of Jefferson and the State of Louisiana, as well as the Parish of Jefferson and its citizens, to determine the matter prior to the date, time, and places for the election to be called in order that fairness as well as feasibility to the candidates for nomination and the voting public be maintained. Defendants prayed for judgment in their favor, dismissing plaintiffs' demands at their costs and with prejudice.

The trial court halted the proceedings and required that plaintiffs join as parties defendant the Parish Executive Committee of each recognized political party as defined by law and each member of the Jefferson Parish School Board not a party plaintiff within ten days of the rendition of the judgment under penalty of dismissal.

Plaintiffs complied with the judgment of the trial court, and after naming additional parties defendant they prayed for the same relief requested in their original petition. All parties defendant prayed for dismissal of plaintiffs' suit.

*351 The trial court rendered a declaratory judgment in favor of plaintiffs, declaring that Act No. 85 of 1960, LSA-R.S. 17:60, was unconstitutional, null, and void; it granted plaintiffs the relief originally prayed for. The Jefferson Parish Democratic Executive Committee and the Jefferson Parish Republican Executive Committee appealed from said judgment to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. The appeal was transferred to this Court pursuant to the authority vested in the Court of Appeal by LSA-C.C.P. Art. 2162; the cause has now been submitted for our determination on appeal.[2]

The instant proceeding was provoked by the decision of Mendel v. Gennaro, 154 So. 2d 531, Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, wherein the Court of Appeal held that LSA-R.S. 17:60(D) governing the election of officers of the Jefferson Parish School Board is a local or special law, prohibited by the Constitution, and that plaintiffs' tenure was governed solely by LSA-R.S. 17:54.

The Mendel Case was a quo warranto proceeding. At a meeting held on December 5, 1962, plaintiffs therein were elected to the offices of president, vice-president, and executive committeeman, for a period of one year under the provisions of LSA-R.S. 17:60(D). At an alleged illegal meeting of the Jefferson Parish School Board on January 7, 1963, plaintiffs were removed from office and defendants were elected to replace them—the vote for removal being nine to eight. The Court of Appeal held that one person voting at the January 7, 1963 meeting was disqualified from voting because he had forfeited his membership on the School Board by accepting an office of profit and trust under the federal government. Art. XIX, Sec. 4, La.Const. of 1921. The vote, therefore, resulted in a tie. In addition to holding LSA-R.S. 17:60(D) unconstitutional and Samuel J. McGrew ineligible to hold or exercise the functions of a Member of the Jefferson Parish School Board, the Court of Appeal in its judgment held:

"That plaintiffs are entitled to be restored forthwith to the respective offices to which they were elected December 5, 1962, until removed at a valid meeting and by a valid vote of the legal members of the Board;
"The judgment of the District Court is reversed [the district court dismissed plaintiffs' suit], and this case is remanded to the District Court to issue such orders as may be necessary to enforce the judgment of this Court; ***."

In refusing to grant Certiorari in the Mendel Case, this Court held: "Writ refused. The result is correct." We did not, therefore, pass upon the correctness of that part of the decision which held that LSA-R.S. 17:60(D) was unconstitutional.

In the instant case, the trial court stated that the basic issue in its consideration of Act 85 of 1960 was whether it was a "local or special law" prohibited by Article IV, Section 4, of the Louisiana Constitution of 1921. The trial court found that Article XII, Section 10, of the Louisiana Constitution of 1921, does give the Legislature authority to provide for the creation and election of parish school boards. But, the trial court further found that it was constrained to declare the entire statute unconstitutional because of the finding in the Mendel Case, supra, that, "Clearly, from a reading of these articles of the Constitution [Art. XII, Secs. 10 and 11, La.Const. of 1921], the only local or special laws regarding school boards which are valid, are those in existence at the time of the adopting of the 1921 Constitution. We find no local or special law governing the Jefferson Parish *352 School Board in effect when the 1921 Constitution was adopted."

Herein, the trial court stated:

"* * * Under Art. 4, Sec. 4 alone, it is possible to make out a case and distinguish `regulating the management of public schools' from the creation and election of parish school boards, but if Art. 12, Sec. 11 must apply as stated, no such distinction can be made. However regrettable it may seem, this Court can only declare the unconstitutionality of the statute and refer the matter back to the parties to seek either appellate relief or legislative relief, or a combination of both."

Counsel for the Jefferson Parish Republican Executive Committee urges this Court to overrule the decision of Mendel v. Gennaro, supra. He further urges that in the instant matter the decision of the trial court should be reversed and Act 85 of 1960 declared a valid and constitutional exercise of the legislative power.

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

Related

Shaw v. Caddo Parish School Bd.
347 So. 2d 39 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 So. 2d 348, 246 La. 51, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jefferson-par-sch-bd-v-jefferson-par-dem-ex-com-la-1964.