State ex rel. Murray v. Lazarus
Supreme Court of Louisiana
A IMPLICATION for Mandamus.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Bermudez, C. J.
This is an application for a mandemws.
The relator claims that he was arbitrarily refused an injunction on the face of a petition entitling him to one, duly sworn to and accompanied by a proper bond. He avers that his petition is in due form, that the judge had no discretion to exercise and was hound to grant the writ as a matter of right; hut that he illegally and wrongfully refused the same.
He annexes the' petition to the present application.
That petition relates- substantially, that the petitioner has complied with a judgment of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Middleton v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Garrison v. HillCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1895
- Appeal of ReberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
3Cited by15 opinions
- State ex rel. Whiteside v. First Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1900
- Wood v. StrotherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- McLeod v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- State ex rel. Sorrel v. FosterSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1901
- City of Huron v. CampbellSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.