Maginnis v. Police Jury
Citations
- 106 La. 293
Syllabus
<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>The proceedings in matter of laying out a public road were regularly conducted. The committee of freeholders, duly appointed and duly qualified, designated the course of the road. Their report was approved by the Police Jury, and the amount of damages found was provided for by ordering warrants to issue for the same. The report and the approval of the Police Jury, and the facts bearing upon the point urged, do not show that the committee of freeholders had failed to lay out a road to the extent that this committee had been directed to act.</p> <p>The value fixed for damages incurred is sworn to as correct by a number of witnesses. This testimony, and the weight due to the report of the freeholders who reside in the neighborhood, sustain defendant’s position regarding the value of the property.</p> <p>Tile proposed route is the shortest and the most direct and, from the testimony, less expensive, and will cause less damage than the others indicated.</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 the legislative history of the statute supports the interpretation that 27 it applies to the parties of a call
- finding that the invasion of privacy inherent in the unauthorized recording of an individual’s conversation, without more, is insufficient to meet the Section 9.73.060 injury requirement
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.