Case Name: STATE ex rel. SMITH v. BEAUREGARD PARISH DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1923-11-13
Citations: 154 La. 603
Docket Number: No. 26338
Parties: STATE ex rel. SMITH v. BEAUREGARD PARISH DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
Judges: By Division A, composed of Chief Justice O’NIELL, and Justices ROGERS and BRU-NOT.
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 154
Pages: 604–604

Head Matter:
(97 South. 876)
No. 26338.
STATE ex rel. SMITH v. BEAUREGARD PARISH DEMOCRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
(Nov. 13, 1923.)
(Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)
Courts <&wkey;224(l I) — Court of Appeal held to have jurisdiction of mandamus to compel placing of name of candidate on official ballot in primary election.
Since the emoluments of the office of police juror for the full term will not amount to $2,-000, the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction under Act No. 97 of 1922, § 27, or under the general law regulating the appellate jurisdiction of courts, and hence a mandamus proceeding to compel' the placing'of the name of the relator on the official ballot in a primary election as candidate for that office’ will be transferred to the Court of Appeal.
Appeal from Fifteenth . Judicial, District Court, Parish of Beauregard; Thos. F. Porter, Judge.
Mandamus by the State, on the relation of James D. Smith, against the Beauregard Parish Democratic Executive Committee. Judgment for relator, and defendant appeals. On motion to transfer ease to Court of Appeal.
Transfer ordered.
Sam H. .Jones, of De Ridder, for appellant. Ped C. Kay, of De Ridder, for appellee.
By Division A, composed of Chief Justice O’NIELL, and Justices ROGERS and BRU-NOT.

Opinion:
' O'NIELL, C. J.
This is a mandamus proceeding to have the name of the relator placed upon the official ballot in the Democratic primary election as a candidate for nomination for the office of police juror. There was judgment for relator, making the alternative writ Of mandamus absolute, and the Parish Democratic executive committee, defendant in-the case,'has appealed.
Counsel for appellant has filed a motion in this court to transfer the ease to the Court of Appeal for the First Circuit, averring that the Supreme Court has not jurisdiction, and that the bringing of the appeal to this court instead of the Court of Appeal was a mistake.
Inasmuch as the emoluments of the office of police juror, for the full term, would not amount to $2,000, the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction, under the Primary Election Law (Act 97 of 1922, § 27, p. 197), or under the general law regulating the appellate jurisdiction of the courts according to the amount in contest. Landry v. Gonzales, 142 La. 577, 77 South. .287.
In the exercise of our discretion under Act 19 of 1912, p. 25,
It is ordered that this case be transferred to the Court of Appeal for the First Circuit.