Case law

United States v. Cruikshank

25 F. Cas. 707 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Apr 15, 1874

But with ■regard to mere constitutional prohibitions of state interference with established or ac- ■ knowledged privileges and immunities, the appropriate legislation to enforce such prohibitions is that which may be necessary … On. the other hand, when the provision is violated: by the passage of an obnoxious law, such law is clearly void, and all acts done under it will be trespasses.

United States v. Goldman

25 F. Cas. 1350 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Nov 15, 1878

Clearly not. … you are qualified to vote for members of congress.

Live-Stock Dealers' & Butchers' Ass'n v. Crescent City Live-Stock Landing & Slaughter-House Co.

15 F. Cas. 649 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Jun 11, 1870

[As to the civil rights bill, we are clearly of opinion that it does not apply; that it was intended merely to secure to citizens of every race and color the same civil rights and privileges as are enjoyed by white citizens … This is not because the privileged person is the inventor of such accommodations, nor because the use of them is a franchise lying only in the public grant, nor because the privileged person is qualified by superior education

Insurance Co. v. New Orleans

13 F. Cas. 67 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Nov 15, 1870

Who are citizens of the United States, within the meaning of the 14th amendment, we think is clearly settled by the terms of the amendment itself. … It is only necessary to place these two provisions of the law side by side to see clearly the meaning of the first.

Barthet v. City of New Orleans

24 F. 563 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · Jul 15, 1885

The fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution forbids any state to make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, and prohibits a state from denying … By giving its permission to an individual or to a corporation, and refusing it to all others, a monopoly could be established by the favored suitor.

Kellogg v. Warmouth

14 F. Cas. 257 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Dec 6, 1872

'The attempt to remove Herron I dismiss with the remark that, if all the governor alleges .against him had been true, it could have been established only by judicial inquiry, and gave the governor no right to displace him … Longstreet. and these four, together with the governor, are clearly the legal board of returning officers.

Louisiana State Lottery Co. v. Fitzpatrick

15 F. Cas. 970 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Apr 15, 1879

The state is not amenable to any suit, and is shielded by the immunity from any process or legal responsibility. … In either case the constitution and "laws that established them were to be subverted and frustrated.

Bayly v. London & L. Ins. Co.

2 F. Cas. 1087 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Jul 1, 1875

But does the proof establish clearly and beyond doubt that the plaintiffs kept saltpetre for sale ? … The word “considerable,” was therefore used as a qualifying word.

United States v. Dauphin

20 F. 625 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · May 12, 1884

Parsons Judge Betts says: “Legislation of such scope and extent would clearly not be in furtherance of the functions and duties of the post-office department.” … “In violation of this section” means in violation of the general and sole prohibition upon which it all rests, and in aid of which its penalties were established.

The E. B. Ward

16 F. 255 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · Mar 15, 1883

Puffendorf, perhaps, lays down the limits within which the early law permitted an individual action or suit more clearly than any other writer. … The congress has already established such a rule for the courts of the United States with reference to one class of acts.

Whitney v. City of New Orleans

43 F. 215 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · Jun 16, 1890

The supreme court were clearly of the opinion that, as an original question, the defendants in the Agnelly and Monsseaux Cases were necessary parties to this case. … The receipt of the costs did not prevent or qualify the subrog'ation.

Sawyer v. Parish of Concordia

12 F. 754 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Jun 15, 1882

Such a right, privilege, or immunity makes up a federal question, and if his suit involves such a question he may begin it in this court. … Y. 259;) but the act must be clearly subversive of the constitution, (Turner v. Alihaus, 6 ISteb. 54; Central 0. R. Co. v. Twenty-Third Street R. Co. 54 ITow. Pr. 168; Remington v.

United States v. Antz

16 F. 119 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · Feb 15, 1883

This command included — First, the selection of the names, which was left to the sheriff’s discretion, from the body of the county, from the class of men who were by law qualified; secondly, the summoning of the • persons … as a prerequisite for the ascertainment of guilt or innocence, cannot be abated one jot or tittle by those who sit to administer the law; that in criminal procedure, matters of form clearly prescribed by law must be held

Gaines v. Lizardi

9 F. Cas. 1042 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Apr 15, 1877

attest her entire respectability and credibility, and taking Brown's testimony in the most' favorable light, it does not necessarily contradict and cannot avail to materially weaken the testimony of a disinterested witness, clearly … Now, as to Bellechasse, with the exception of this letter to Cox, there is nothing in the record to impugn or qualify what he says; his language and ideas throughout are those of an earnest, chivalrous man, who is entirely

New Orleans Water-Works Co. v. St. Tammany Water-Works Co.

14 F. 194 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · Sep 15, 1882

No question could more clearly show “a matter in dispute, arising under the constitution of the United States.” … (b) The act must be clearly subversive of the constitution, (c) — a clear violation, (d) — and theobjec *202 tion must not be doubtful.

Pickett's Heirs v. Foster

36 F. 514 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · Feb 15, 1888

June 2,1874; that before any other, proceedings were had therein, Lanier resigned his office, and George • Foster, one of the defendants in that suit, was appointed and qualified as public administrator in his place, and … It is not necessary to consider that point, because it seems to be clearly established by the courts in Louisiana that a public administrator, like any other person desiring to administer a succession, must, before ho can

New York Life Ins. v. Board of Assessors for the Parish of Orleans

158 F. 462 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Louisiana · Jan 11, 1908

The defendants have made no effort to contradict or qualify in any particular the testimony of these witnesses, which may therefore be accepted as accurately stating the facts. Mr. John C. … These instruments are clearly not credits, but mere agreements to extend the time for paying the premiums.