Case Name: FOSTER et al. v. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF SHREVEPORT. In re MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF SHREVEPORT
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1915-03-22
Citations: 136 La. 1087
Docket Number: No. 21181
Parties: FOSTER et al. v. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF SHREVEPORT. In re MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF SHREVEPORT.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 136
Pages: 1087–1087

Head Matter:
(68 South. 134)
No. 21181.
FOSTER et al. v. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF SHREVEPORT. In re MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF SHREVEPORT.
(March 22, 1915.)
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Certiorari <&wkey;12 — Prohibition <&wkey;5 — Preliminary Injunction — Dismissal.
Where plaintiffs in an injunction suit, after the issuance of a preliminary injunction, move to dismiss the suit at their cost, the application by defendants to this court for writs of certiorari and prohibition in the cause will be dismissed, as there is no suit pending in the district court.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Certiorari, Cent. Dig. § 18; Dec. Dig. &wkey;>12; Prohibition, . Cent. Dig. §§ 20-30; Dec. Dig. <&wkey;5.]
Suit by J. C. Foster and others against the Mayor and City Council of the City of Shreveport. Suit dismissed, and defendants apply for certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition.
Rule nisi recalled, and proceedings dismissed.
Lewell C. Butler, City Atty., of Shreveport (Thigpen & I-Ierold, of Shreveport, of counsel), for applicants. Hall & Jack and Foster, Looney & Wilkinson, all of Shreveport, for plaintiffs. R. D. Webb, in pro. per.

Opinion:
SOMMERVILLE, J.
R. D. Webb, judge of the First judicial district court of Louisiana, in and for the parish of Caddo, was ordered, March 3d, to show cause, March 15, 1915, why the writ of prohibition asked for by the defendants in this cause, relators in this court, should not issue, restraining him from proceeding further in the enforcement of a preliminary writ of injunction, issued March 1st, to prevent an election being held in the city of Shreveport on March 4, 1915.
In his return made this day, in response to the order of the court, the district judge shows that this suit was dismissed, on motion of the plaintiffs, March 6, 1915, at the cost of plaintiffs. There is no suit" pending.
The rule nisi issued herein is recalled; and this proceeding is dismissed.