State v. Sadler
Citations
- 51 La. Ann. 1397
- 26 So. 390
- 1899 La. LEXIS 580
Syllabus
<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>Upon well settled principles, it would be inconsistent with the convenience and security of the public, and with due regard to the rights of one acting in an official capacity, under the color of, and a belief in, lawful authority to do so. that the validity of the acts of a judge should be 'disputed, or the legal effect of his appointment and qualification as codal commissioner be determined, in proceedings to which he is not a party.</p> <p>This rule extends to all officers, executive or judicial, and applies alike to questions of ihe validity of the original election or appointment, and to questions whether the commission or authority has expired by its own limitation, or by the acceptance of an incompatible office.</p> <p>An officer do facto is one who executes the duties of an office under some color of right, some -pretence or claim of title, either by election or appointment; and the acts of an officer de fact'o are valid when they concern the public, or the rights of third persons, and can not be indirectly called in question in a suir to which such officer is not a party ; and, his right can only be questioned in a suit against him.</p> <p>This rule is sanctioned by the great weight of authority in England and the United States, and has been often announced and recognized by this court.</p> <p>The general rule, with regard to the admissibility of dying declarations is, that the statements of deceased should have been uttered under a sense of impending dissolution. To render such declarations receivable in evidence, the deceased need not have been at the time in articulo mortis. It is only-necessary that same should have been made under a sense of speedy dissolution, or a sense of approaching death; though it need not appear that he-believed he would die immediately.</p> <p>It appearing from the statement of the witness that he heard the fatal shot fired, and immediately repaired to the spot where it occurred, within the-space of a few se
Judges: Been, Blanchard, Monkoe, Monroe, Takes, Watkins, When
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
19 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Feinblum v. Louisiana State Board of Optom. Exam.Louisiana Court of Appeal· 1957-10-04· cited 22×
- People v. WebbAppellate Court of Illinois· 1984-03-30· cited 22×
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1923-02-26· cited 22×
- State v. MoreauSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1923-04-02· cited 17×
- Michell v. Louisiana State Board of Optometry Exam.Louisiana Court of Appeal· 1962-09-24· cited 15×
- State ex rel. Davis v. Police Jury of Webster ParishSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1907-11-18· cited 14×
- City of Baton Rouge v. CooleySupreme Court of Louisiana· 1982-09-24· cited 12×
- Love v. BadenLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1985-11-20· cited 12×
- State v. BagwellSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1923-12-17· cited 8×
- Duplechain v. TurnerLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1984-01-12· cited 7×
- State v. SanfordNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1939-12-29· cited 7×
- State v. MontalbanoSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1971-02-24· cited 6×
- State v. BolleroSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1904-06-06· cited 5×
- State v. DanielsSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1905-06-05· cited 3×
- State v. HopkinsSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1922-12-29· cited 2×
- Succession of SampognaroLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2004-12-15· cited 1×
- Opinion NumberLouisiana Attorney General Reports· 2000-05-09
- Shields v. Town of LeesvilleLouisiana Court of Appeal· 1927-06-28
- State ex rel. D.P.B.Louisiana Court of Appeal· 2002-05-08
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.