State ex rel. Ranger v. City of New Orleans
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Tissot, J. By reference to the reasons, it is seen that judgments are expressly based on contracts made by legislative authority, found in Acts Nos. 108 and 109 of the Legislature of 1834, the records of which are in this Court, “ and not another tribunal.” Courts will judicially notice that the bonds sued on wexe issued by legislative authority as a historical fact. 5 Rob. 123, LTnvilliers.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Tissot, J. By reference to the reasons, it is seen that judgments are expressly based on contracts made by legislative authority, found in Acts Nos. 108 and 109 of the Legislature of 1834, the records of which are in this Court, “ and not another tribunal.” Courts will judicially notice that the bonds sued on wexe issued by legislative authority as a historical fact. 5 Rob. 123, LTnvilliers. A judgment of the Supreme Court need not be formally introduced in evidence, and is judicially noticed. 1 An. 283.
1Opinion
On the Merits.
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Todd, J.
This is a mandamus proceeding to compel the official representatives of the City of New Orleans, to levy a special tax to pay certain judgments which the Relator claims to have recovered against the City, amounting to about $170,000.
The answer, besides the general issue, avers ignorance of the consideration of the judgments, and requires strict proof of the same. There was judgment for the Relator, making the mandamus peremptory, and the City has appealed.
In the cases of the State ex rel. Folsom Bros. vs. City of New Orleans, 32…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Holt v. StateSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1895
- Donnell v. County CommissionersSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1895
- Moore v. WoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895