Orleans Navigation Co v. Mayor of New-Orleans
Supreme Court of Louisiana
The Court having been divided, on the first argument of this case, their attention was again drawn to it. By consent, three paragraph of the Moniteur de la Louisiane, a paper printed under the eye of the Baron de Carondelet, were read in evidence. They were allowed to be official.
Read the full summary
The Court having been divided, on the first argument of this case, their attention was again drawn to it. By consent, three paragraph of the Moniteur de la Louisiane, a paper printed under the eye of the Baron de Carondelet, were read in evidence. They were allowed to be official. I. The first is in No. 13, dated May 24, 1794, it announces the project of a canal, which, carrying the waters of the city and its environs into one of the branches of the Bayou St. John, will rid it of the stagnating waters which contribute in a great degree to its invalubility and the vast quantities of musquitoes…
1Opinion of the Court
Lewis J
They ought to be so. The case has been twice and very fully argued.
*30MARTIN, J.
It is not in my power to concur. The opinion, which has now become that of the court, was shewn to me after the depLirture of Judge Mathews, and I then declared my inability to join in it.
As the defendants' counsel are dissatisfied, arid have filed reasons for a new trial, it will naturally follow that one of the members of the court, who deemed it his duty to dissent from the o~i-nion of the majority, will readily incline to a rehearing and will reluctiiitly forego the opportunity of listening to an argument…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Louisiana State Bank v. Orleans Navigation Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1848
- State v. Carondelet Canal & Navigation Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1910