Brown Shoe Co. v. Hill

Citations

• 51 La. Ann. 920
• 25 So. 634
• 1899 La. LEXIS 499

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. The ruling -in Toole vs. Minge, 50th Ann., 748, reaffirmed as a correct inter* pretation of the true meaning and intention of Art. 101 of the Constitution of 1898.</p> <p>2. Sec. 2 of Act 191 of the Acts of 1898, in declaring that the party cast in the Court of Appeals, or other person in interest who may feel aggrieved by the judgment rendered, shall in any case have the right to bring the ■cause before the Supreme Court for its review and determination, goes beyond tbe constitutional intendment, and, as far as it does, is not to be followed.</p> <p>3. Where the legislative interpretation of a constitutional provision conflicts with the judicial interpretation thereof, the latter prevails.</p> <p>4. A rule of this court requires litigants, making application for the writ of review, to annex to such application a copy of the opinion of the Court of Appeals complained of. Hereafter no application for the writ will be considered unless the opinion of the Court of Appeals is so annexed.</p>