State ex rel. Durapan v. Judge of the Fourth Judicial District Court

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State ex rel. Durapan v. Judge of the Fourth Judicial District Court

24 La. Ann. 610

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedDecember 15, 1872

DocketNo. 4092

StatusPublished

This text of 24 La. Ann. 610 (State ex rel. Durapan v. Judge of the Fourth Judicial District Court) 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

State ex rel. Durapan v. Judge of the Fourth Judicial District Court, 24 La. Ann. 610 (La. 1872).

Pincite

Opinion

Ludeling, C. J.

The relator, according to the sworn allegations of his petition, was suspended irom exercising the functions of the office-of Clerk of the Fourth District Court of the parish of St. Charles by the judge thereof, under section 1955 of the Revised Statutes.

The ouly question presented for decision now is, whether the relator has a right to appeal from that judgment of suspension1? The relator alleged in his answer that the law under which the judge was proceeding was unconstitutional. We think it is clear that he has a right to have an appeal to decide that question. The defendant has failed! to file an answer to the rule nisi.

It is therefore ordered that the mandamus be made peremptory.

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

Ludeling, C. J.

The relator, according to the sworn allegations of his petition, was suspended irom exercising the functions of the office-of Clerk of the Fourth District Court of the parish of St. Charles by the judge thereof, under section 1955 of the Revised Statutes.

The ouly question presented for decision now is, whether the relator has a right to appeal from that judgment of suspension1? The relator alleged in his answer that the law under which the judge was proceeding was unconstitutional. We think it is clear that he has a right to have an appeal to decide that question. The defendant has failed! to file an answer to the rule nisi.

It is therefore ordered that the mandamus be made peremptory.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 La. Ann. 610, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-durapan-v-judge-of-the-fourth-judicial-district-court-la-1872.