The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1917-11-10
DECISION IN POLICE JURY SUIT,
Full Text of Opinion Handed Down by State Supreme
Court in Noted Ascension Case-Judgment of District
Court, in Favor Of Defendants Amended BY Sustain
ing Exception to Jurisdiction


ing that it was not an action to de-
termine a disputed title to office; say
ing further: IF it were such an action,
nothing can be better settled than
that, under the laws of this state, it
could only be brought in the name of
the state by the attorney general Tin
the parish of Orleans) on his own in
formation, or on the information of
any other person interested, and who
may be joined as plaintiff therein.
r. S. Secs. 2593 sat seq; Hayes VS..
Thompson, 81 Ann. 655; State VS..
Delasize, i'd. ITO; Osgood VS.. Block,
33 Ann. 493.'
" It is a corollary Of the above
principle that an injunction is not a
proper remedy to try title to public
Office. High on mi. (2nd edition)
Secs. 1312-13.'
:'The above finding was affirmed in
Goldman VS.. Gillespie, 43 La. Ann.
80; 81 Am. D., Sec. ia.
"And in the case of Watson VS.. Nc
Grath, II La. 1897, Sc South. 204,
where plaintiff sought to enjoin de-
fendant from acting as treasurer of
the city of New Orleans by appoint
ment of the mayor, the court said: !:
Plaintiff is a plaintiff in injunction.
He must show right in himself. It
does not suffice for him to show alb
sence of right in his adversary. If,
as chief deputy or clerk, he is not en-
titled to hold the Office he has no right
to an injunction, no matter what the
authority or no authority, of the de-
fendant may be. + = It is well set
tied that an officer appointed under
an unconstitutiona law may be an of
fcer de facto, and his acts as such be
valid, and a protection to all parties
dealing with him in his apparent le-
gal capacity Am. & Eng. E. of Law,
vol. 8, p. 775.'
''If in the opinion of plaintiffs, de-
fendants are intruders into the offices
of police jurors for the seventh and
eighth wards of Ascension parish,
their title to such Offices can be tested
under the intrusion into office act,
No. 156, 1868, p. 199; R. S. 2593 ct
seq; which provides another remedy.
tThe law as stated in High on In
functions, section 1872, has been gen.
orally followed in this state, and is as
follows: No principle of the law of
injunctions, and perhaps no doctrine
of equity jurisprudence is more def
nitely fixed or more clearly establish
ed than that court d equity will not
Interfere BY III jsa re- On to determine
questions concerning the appointment
or election of public officers or their
title to office, such questions being of
a purely legal nature, and cognizable
only by courts Of law. A court of
equity will not permit itself to be
made the forum for determining dis
puted questions of title to public of
fees, or for the trial of contested
elections, but will in all such cases
leave the claimant Of the Office to pur-
sue the statutory remedy, if there be
such, or the common law remedy by
proceedings in the nature of quo
warranto. Thus, equity will not in
terfere by injunction to restrain per-
sons from exercising the functions of
public office, on the grounds of the
illegality of the law under which their
appointments were made, but will
leave that question to be determined
by the legal forum. And temporary
injunction granted pendente lite, and
until the question Of the validity of
the law under which defendants claim
their offices can be determined, will
be dissolved
'The exception to the jurisdiction
of the court ratione materiae in the
matter of the issuance of the injunc-
ton should have been sustained. And,
being sustained, the exception of no
cause, involving the constitutionality
of Act 100, 1916, p. 429, will not be
considered.
'It is therefore ordered, adjudged
and decreed that the judgment ap.
pealed from be amended by sustain
ing the exception to the jurisdiction
of the court ratione materiae in the
matter of the issuance of the inJunc-
tion; and as thus amended it is affirm
ed at the cost Of the appellants.
Syllabus.
81. An injunction will not lie al
the instance of the plaintiff to prevent
an additional police juror from serv
| ing as member of the police jury
where plaintiff fails to allege thai
tguch appointee will GUST plaintiff from
his office, or deprive him of fixee
rights or emoluments therein.
"O'Niell, j., is of the opinion tina
the judgment of the district cour
should be affirmed on the ground tha
Act No. 100 of 1916, authorizing th'
governor to appoint the additiona
police jurors, does not violate an.
provision of the constitution; but h
| does not concur in the opinion tha
the plaintiffs herein had no remedy b.
injunction.