Case Name: The State ex rel. W. F. Schwing, District Attorney, pro tem. vs. The Judge of the District Court for Lafayette
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1880
Citations: 1 Mann. Unrep. Cas. 220
Docket Number: No. 7179
Parties: The State ex rel. W. F. Schwing, District Attorney, pro tem. vs. The Judge of the District Court for Lafayette.
Judges: 
Reporter: Unreported cases heard and determined by the Supreme Court of Louisiana, from January 8, 1877, to April, 1880
Volume: 1
Pages: 220–221

Head Matter:
No. 7179.
The State ex rel. W. F. Schwing, District Attorney, pro tem. vs. The Judge of the District Court for Lafayette.
In all cases in which the right to an office is involved, the appeal is returnable to the Supreme Court in ten days wherever it may be sitting.
For a Mandamus.
T. A. Breaux, Perry, Caffrey and Delahoussaye for Relator.
The act of 3870, extra session, p. 100, enacts that in all cases in which the right to office is involved, the appeal shall be returnable in ten days and the appellate court shall give the cause preference. Sec. 2604, Rev. Stats. of 1870, provides that appeals in such cases shall be returnable either at New Orleans or at one of the country terms. The Acts of 1870 are to have precedence over the Revised Statutes when they are in conflict.

Opinion:
Manning, C. J.
We have come to the conclusion that these acts are not in conflict, and that we shall best give effect to the intention of the Legislature by construing them together.
The object was to afford a speedy trial to contestations over the right to office, in the interests of the public, so that the rightful occupant of any public office may be quickly known. The language of the seventh section of the Act of 1870, does not forbid, though it does not necessarily imply the return of the appeal to this court, wherever it may be sitting at the time the appeal is taken, but when construed with section 2604 of the Revised Statutes the intent of the Legislature is manifest to permit appeals in suits of this kind to be thus returned.
In the present case, however, we effectuate that intention by refusing the mandamus. Our term here ends to-day. In ten days the term at Opelousas commences. The appeal has already been sent to that place, and we can afford that speedy trial, which the law desires and intended to provide for, by hearing the case there.
There is another reason, however, which would compel us to refuse the mandamus prayed herein.
This proceeding is not, strictly speaking, one under the Intrusion Act. It is a rule to shew cause why the district and parish judge of Iberia, should not be recused in a suit instituted, or to be instituted, under that act. Upon that ground alone the refusal of the mandamus was properly made.
Writ refused.