Wooton v. Farac

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Wooton v. Farac

72 So. 2d 518, 225 La. 313, 1954 La. LEXIS 1216

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMarch 22, 1954

DocketNo. 41597

StatusPublished

This text of 72 So. 2d 518 (Wooton v. Farac) 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

Wooton v. Farac, 72 So. 2d 518, 225 La. 313, 1954 La. LEXIS 1216 (La. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

McCALEB, Justice.

In this case, Chester Wooton, Sheriff of the Parish of Plaquemines, filed a rule against Mato Farac and Irving Hingle to show cause why he should not destroy six certain slot machines owned by them which were confiscated by him while located at the Delta Club in Port Sulphur, Louisiana. In due course, the defendants appeared and objected to the seizure and summary destruction of the gambling devices, contending that Act No. 231 of 1928 (now LSA-R.S. 15:26.1) had been repealed by Act No. 6 of 1948 (now LSA-R.S. 47:375) and that the former was rmconstitutional.

After a hearing, the judge ruled in favor of defendants. Thereafter the Sheriff and Francis C. Grevemberg, Superintendent of the Division of State Police, who alleges that he is aggrieved by the judgment, prosecuted separate appeals.

This appeal presents the identical issue as that in Guillot v. Nunez, 225 La. 301, 72 So.2d 513. The cases were consolidated for argument and the opinion in that matter is controlling here.

The judgment appealed from is therefore annulled and reversed. The rule taken by Chester Wooten, Sheriff of the Parish of Plaquemines, is now made absolute and he is forthwith ordered to destroy the six slot machines confiscated by him in accordance with the provisions of LSA-R.S. 15:26.1. The defendants are to pay all costs.

HAMITER, J., concurs in the decree.

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

McCALEB, Justice.

In this case, Chester Wooton, Sheriff of the Parish of Plaquemines, filed a rule against Mato Farac and Irving Hingle to show cause why he should not destroy six certain slot machines owned by them which were confiscated by him while located at the Delta Club in Port Sulphur, Louisiana. In due course, the defendants appeared and objected to the seizure and summary destruction of the gambling devices, contending that Act No. 231 of 1928 (now LSA-R.S. 15:26.1) had been repealed by Act No. 6 of 1948 (now LSA-R.S. 47:375) and that the former was rmconstitutional.

After a hearing, the judge ruled in favor of defendants. Thereafter the Sheriff and Francis C. Grevemberg, Superintendent of the Division of State Police, who alleges that he is aggrieved by the judgment, prosecuted separate appeals.

This appeal presents the identical issue as that in Guillot v. Nunez, 225 La. 301, 72 So.2d 513. The cases were consolidated for argument and the opinion in that matter is controlling here.

The judgment appealed from is therefore annulled and reversed. The rule taken by Chester Wooten, Sheriff of the Parish of Plaquemines, is now made absolute and he is forthwith ordered to destroy the six slot machines confiscated by him in accordance with the provisions of LSA-R.S. 15:26.1. The defendants are to pay all costs.

HAMITER, J., concurs in the decree.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 So. 2d 518, 225 La. 313, 1954 La. LEXIS 1216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wooton-v-farac-la-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack