De Armas' Case
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Mazureau, the attorney-general, as amicus curiæ, made application for a rehearing, in this case, on the following grounds. 1. The decision is, to all intents and purposes, a definitive judgment. No appeal can be had against it. As such, it ought to contain a reference to the particular law in virtue of which it was rendered. Now the truth is, that it refers not particularly to a law, but generally to the third Partida, which contains 616 laws.
Read the full summary
Mazureau, the attorney-general, as amicus curiæ, made application for a rehearing, in this case, on the following grounds. 1. The decision is, to all intents and purposes, a definitive judgment. No appeal can be had against it. As such, it ought to contain a reference to the particular law in virtue of which it was rendered. Now the truth is, that it refers not particularly to a law, but generally to the third Partida, which contains 616 laws. Which of them is the particular one that is referred to? It is obvious, that the requisite of the constitution has not been complied with. The…
1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.
observed that the rehearing was not prayed for, with the hope of shewing the absence of guilt in the defendant, nor on the ground of the punishment inflicted being excessive.
1. That the case relied on by the counsel, Gray & al. vs Laverty, 4 Martin, 436, in order to establish his first position, (viz. that the judgment of this court is unconstitutional and null; the reference being only to the third Partida) proves the contrary proposition, even in the case of a judgment, which contains no *162reference. "When it (the reference) is not made, those who are to pass on the conduct of the judge, in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dormenon's CaseSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1810
3Cited by3 opinions
- Yeiser v. SmithSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1822
- Lazare's v. PeytavinSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1823
- Miltenberger v. City of New OrleansLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1884