Endom v. City of Monroe
Citations
- 112 La. 779
- 36 So. 681
- 1904 La. LEXIS 464
Syllabus
<p>MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENTS — ASSESSMENTS—SPECIAL ELECTION — CONDUCT—RIGHT TO VOTE-CORPORATE SHAREHOLDER — REGISTRATION OP VOTERS — CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — CONSTRUCTION.</p> <p>1. No election is vitiated under statute for holding special election by failure to open the polls on the time prescribed on account of the temporary absence of the commissioners of election during the day, unless on a contest it be shown that voters were thereby deprived of their votes in number and amount sufficient to change the result of the election. Commissioners should not leave the polling precinct. In this instance their absence was not prejudicial.</p> <p>2. The voter must present his ballot to the commissioners at the ballot box, and not attach undue importance to the utterances of those who meet him on the street, and say to him that his vote will not be received, and stay away and fail to offer to vote. Non constat, had he offered to vote, that the commissioners would have declined to receive his vote.</p> <p>3. The owner of shares of stock in a bank assessed within the limits of the city, which is owned by a resident taxpayer, is authorized under the statute to vote them.</p> <p>4. The agent of a voter should exhibit his proxy to the commissioners. The commissioners cannot dispense with its production. It is made a sine qua non prior to receiving the vote; otherwise the commissioners might waive the proxy entirely, which is not within the contemplation of law.</p> <p>5. The survivor in community, whose interest in the “community” is judicially established, can vote at a special election. If not clearly established, the vote shall not be received. Commissioners of election cannot pass upon the right of the survivor in community, not settled, in order to determine whether he or she should vote. The community interests were properly excluded, as they were not separated from “succession” interests.</p> <p>6. The usufructuary is not a property taxpayer, and he therefore cannot vote at a s
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that Massachusetts courts apply the “functional approach to choice of law” and determining that Swedish law would likely apply to a dispute where Sweden had the “most significant relationship” with the parties and conduct at issue
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Breaux
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.