Case Name: Mayor and Council of the City of Carrollton et als. v. Board of Metropolitan Police et als.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1869-05
Citations: 21 La. Ann. 447
Docket Number: No. 1954
Parties: Mayor and Council of the City of Carrollton et als. v. Board of Metropolitan Police et als.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 21
Pages: 447–450

Head Matter:
No. 1954
Mayor and Council of the City of Carrollton et als. v. Board of Metropolitan Police et als.
The act of the Legislature of March 17# 1859# incorporating the city of Carrollton authorize* suit to he brought by the Mayor and councilmon for and on behalf of tho city.
The affidavit of the Mayor that the interest of the city is above five hundred dollars is sufficient to give the Supreme Court jurisdiction of the appeal.
Under the charter the city of Carrollton is dispensed from giving bond in case of appeal. Act approved seventeenth of March» 1859.
The act of the Legislature of September If# 18C8, creating a metropolitan police district repealed so much of the charter of the city of Carrollton approved March 17, 1859, as gave to the Mayor of said city tho control and administration of the police.
Tho act of the Legislature of September 14, 1868, look away all control over the police of tbo city of Carrollton from tbo Mayor and vested tho same in the Board of Metropolitan Police, and the Mayor and council in their representative capacity having no right in themselves to administer the police, they cannot question the constitutionality of the act of the Legislature vesting the power of policing the city iu the Board of Metropolitan Police.
A party wishing to have the constitutionality of an act of the Legislature tested before the courts must disclose an interest in his individual or representative capacity that is affected by the statute of which he complains.
That part of the act of tho Legislature of September 14, 18C8, creating a metropolitan police district and providing for the government thereof, which divests the Mayor and Council of the city of Carrollton from all control over the police of said city and vests the same in the Board of Metropolitan Police created by tbe act, is constitutional and valid.
ly PPEAL from tlie Second District Court, parish, of Jefferson. Par-dee, J.
P. G. Elliot and N. Coinvumdeur, for plaintiffs and appellants. J. ILawldns, for defendants and ax>pellees, F. Filleul on the same side.

Opinion:
Wily, J.
Appellees move to dismiss this appeal on the following grounds, viz:
First — Because the city of Carrollton is not a party to this suit. The plaintiffs being " one Mayor, six councilmon and five policemen of the city of Carrollton," who sue in their official capacity.
Second — Because the plaintiffs and appellants have given no appeal bond.
Third — Because the record does not show that the interest of each and all the appellants in the matter in dispute exceeds five hundred dollars.
The section of the act approved seventeenth March, 1859, entitled "an act to incorporate the, city of Carrollton," provides: " That the affairs of said city of Carrollton shall he administered by a Mayor and eight councilmen, and in and by the name of Mayor and Council of the city of Carrollton. The said corporation shall he and is hereby made capable in law, to sue and he sued, plead and he impleaded, answer and he answered, defend and he defended in any court or courts of record or justice or other place whatever; hut in all judicial proceedings where, by existing laws, bond and security is required from litigants,.the city of Carrollton shall he dispensed from furnishing bond or security." Act of 1859, 219, No. 277.
This suit is filed by the Mayor and six councilmen of the city of Carrollton in their official capacity. We consider the city of Carroll-ton the real party plaintiff in this suit. The act incorporating the city of Carrollton, a part of which we have just quoted, expressly declares that the city may sue and bo sued in the name of the Mayor and Council of the city of Carrollton.
The majority of the councilmen have the right to sue in the name of the board. 3. M. 495.
The city of Carrollton is dispensed from giving bond.
The Mayor has filed his affidavit in this court stating that the interest of the city of Carrollton in the matter in dispute exceeds five hundred dollars. This is sufficient to give this court jurisdiction.
It is therefore ordered that the motion to dismiss be overruled.