Skip to main content
· 6/24/1903

Carnes v. Police Jury

Citations

  • 110 La. 1011
  • 35 So. 267

Syllabus

<p>INTOXICATING LIQUORS — REGULATION—REWARD — POLICE JURY — POWERS.</p> <p>1.The power to regulate the police of taverns, grog shops, etc., is not confined to the mere adoption of regulations, but extends to the taking of such measures as may be deemed expedient to prevent the violation of the regulations after they are adopted, such as the offering of a reward for evidence on which to convict offenders.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that counsel’s statements about withdrawing or dropping a claim is not an admission of fact because the statement involves a legal theory
  • finding that attorney’s statements were not admissible because they “were not admissions of fact at all, but merely articulations of counsel’s conception of the legal theory of the case”
  • “A party cannot raise new arguments in support of summary judgment for the first time in a reply brief, [] let alone at oral argument.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Provosty

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.