State ex rel. Shaw v. Monroe

The opinion of the. court was delivered by

Breaux, J.

The relator in his petition for a writ of prohibition alleges that the case against him, though listed on the call docket, was not fixed for trial in the manner required by Art. 23 of the Act of 1882 — in other words, that it was fixed for trial without calling.

In his answer the respondent avers that the order for trial as issued gave to the relator all he asks or could have asked.

*28That the case is not one for the issuance of the writ of prohibition; his jurisdiction ratione personae et ratione materias is unquestioned, and the injury, if…