Lee v. Lancaster

262 So. 2d 124, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 5742
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided May 4, 1972·No. No. 5307·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER' CURIAM.

Plaintiff, the democratic candidate for Representative of House District 80, appeals a judgment which dismissed, on exception to the court’s jurisdiction, plaintiff’s demand that defendant, the Republican candidate who won the general election, be declared ineligible for failure to meet the residency requirements for legislators stated by Const, art. 3 § 9.1

But Const, art. 3 § 10 provides:

“Each house shall be the judge of the qualifications, election, and returns of its own members, choose its own officers, except the president of the Senate, determine the rules of its procedure, not inconsistent with the' provisions -of this Constitution, and may punish its members for disorderly conduct and contempt, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its members elected, may expel a member.”

Where art. 3 § 10 is applicable, as in the case of a general election contest, the courts have no jurisdiction. State ex rel. O’Donnell v. Houston, 40 La.Ann. 598, 4 So. 482 (1888).

Plaintiff argues eligibility under art. 3 § 9 is not among the “qualifications” of which the House is the judge under art. 3 § 10. To the contrary, we hold that it is precisely those qualifications (including residency) which are stated by art. 3 § 9 of which § 10 makes the House the judge.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Lee v. Lancaster, 262 So. 2d 124, 1972 La. App. LEXIS 5742 (La. Ct. App. 1972).

262 So. 2d 124 (Lee v. Lancaster) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Ex Rel. Olson v. Bakken
329 N.W.2d 575 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1983)
Gerald v. Louisiana State Senate
408 So. 2d 426 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1981)
LaCaze v. Johnson
305 So. 2d 140 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1974)