State ex rel. Bienvenu v. Wrotnowski
Supreme Court of Louisiana
from the Sixth District Court of New Orleans, Duplaniier, J. Any one having an interest may intervene. C. P. 390. The court cannot refuse the intervention.
Read the full summary
from the Sixth District Court of New Orleans, Duplaniier, J. Any one having an interest may intervene. C. P. 390. The court cannot refuse the intervention. C. P. 394. In Tapping on Mandamus, (3 Law Library, 6th series, 350,) [302,] it is said: “ The court will, in general, allow all those against whom the rule nisi has been granted, or upon whom it has been served, or have had notice, or who are legally interested in the question, to show canse. ” Mr. Shaw’s right of intervention is, therefore, undoubted. 2. Writ of mandamus is addressed to a party directing him to perform some certain act…
1Opinion of the CourtIlslbv, J.
t>n the 14th May, 1865, the Sixth District Court of New Orleans granted its mandate, ordering Stanislas 'Wrotnowsld, secretary of state, to affix his official signature and the seal of his office to the commission signed and issued by James Madison Wells, Governor of the State of Louisiana, under date of 1st May, 1865; or, in default thereof, that the said Wrotnowsld show cause to the contrary, on Monday, the 11th May, 1865.
On the day last mentioned, Wrotnowsld excepted to the petition of the relators, on the following grounds :
1. That there was a misjoinder of parties, relators, in said case.
2Cited by6 opinions
- State ex rel. Fleming v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Florida · 1891
- State ex rel. Benton v. ElderNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Layman v. Succession of WoulfeSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1915
- Jaramillo v. State Ex Rel. Board of County Com'rsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1926
- State ex rel. Miller v. BarberWyoming Supreme Court · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.