Walker v. Sauvinet

Decision Date01 October 1875
Citation23 L.Ed. 678,92 U.S. 90
PartiesWALKER v. SAUVINET
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana.

This is an action brought by Sauvinet against Walker, a licensed keeper of a coffee-house in New Orleans, for refusing him refreshments when called for, on the ground that he was a man of color.

Art. 13 of the Constitution of Louisiana provides that 'all persons shall enjoy equal rights and privileges upon any conveyance of a public character; and all places of business or of public resort, or for which a license is required by either state, parish, or municipal authority, shall be deemed places of a public character, and shall be open to the accommodation and patronage of all persons, without distinction or discrimination on account of race or color.' On the 23d February, 1869, an act was passed by the general assembly of the State, entitled 'An Act to enforce the thirteenth article of the Constitution of this State, and to regulate the licenses mentioned in said thirteenth article.' Sect. 3 of this act is as follows:——

'SECT. 3. That all licenses hereafter granted by this State, and by all parishes and municipalities therein, to persons engaged in business, or keeping places of public resort, shall contain the express condition, that the place of business or public resort shall be open to the accommodation and patronage of all persons, without distinction or discrimination on account of race or color; and any person who shall violate the condition of such license shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by forfeiture of his license, and his place of business or public resort shall be closed, and, moreover, [he] shall be liable at the suit of the person aggrieved to such damages as he shall sustain thereby, before any court of competent jurisdiction.'

On the 27th February, 1871, another act was passed, entitled 'An Act to regulate the mode of trying cases arising under the provisions of article thirteen (13) of the Constitution of Louisiana, or under any acts of the legislature to enforce the said article thirteen of the said Constitution, and to regulate the licenses therein mentioned.'

Sects. 1 and 2 of this act are as follows:——

'SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Louisiana in general assembly convened, That all cases brought for the purpose of vindicating, asserting, or maintaining the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to all persons under the provisions of the article thirteen of the Constitution of Louisiana, or under the provisions of any acts of the legislature to enforce the said article thirteen, and to regulate the licenses therein mentioned, or for the purpose of recovering damages for the violation of said rights, privileges, and immunities, shall be tried by the court, or by a jury if any party to the suit prays for a trial by jury.

'SECT. 2. Be it further enacted, &c., That if the jury do not agree, or fail to render a verdict, either for the plaintiff or defendant, the jury shall be discharged, and the case shall be immediately submitted to the judge upon the pleadings and evidence already on file, as if the case had been originally tried without the intervention of a jury; and it shall be the duty of the judge to decide the case at once, without any further proceedings, arguments, continuance, or delay; each party having the right to appeal to the Supreme Court in all cases where an appeal is allowed by law.'

Walker in his answer denied all the allegations in the petition, and prayed for a trial by jury. The cause was thereupon tried by a jury, who failed to agree. This having been entered upon the minutes, Sauvinet, by his counsel, moved that the court proceed to decide the case under the provisions of sect. 2 of the act of 1871. To this Walker objected, alleging for cause that the act was unconstitutional, but without specifying in what particular. Time was given couns...

To continue reading

Request your trial
294 cases
  • El Dorado County v. Schneider
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • July 22, 1986
    ... ... (Palko v. Connecticut (1937) 302 U.S. 319, 324 [58 S.Ct. 149, 151, 82 L.Ed. 288, 291]; Walker v. Sauvinet (1876) [2 Otto 90, 92-"93], 92 U.S. 90, 92-"93 [23 L.Ed. 678, 679]; Dorsey v. Barba (1952) 38 Cal.2d 350, 357, 240 P.2d 604; Lavine v ... ...
  • County of El Dorado v. Schneider
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 13, 1987
    ... ... (Palko v. Connecticut (1937) 302 U.S. 319, 324, 58 S.Ct. 149, 151, 82 L.Ed. 288, 291; Walker v. Sauvinet (1876) 92 U.S. (2 Otto) 90, 92-93, 23 L.Ed. 678, 679; Dorsey v. Barba (1952) 38 Cal.2d 350, 357, 240 P.2d 604; Lavine v. Hospital of ... ...
  • Boyd v. Bulala
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia
    • November 5, 1986
    ...to the United States Constitution, but this right does not apply to the states through the fourteenth amendment. Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. (2 Otto) 90, 23 L.Ed. 678 (1876); Minneapolis & St. L. R.R. v. Bombolis, 241 U.S. 211, 36 S.Ct. 595, 60 L.Ed. 961 (1916); New York Central R.R. v. Whi......
  • Nickey v. State ex rel. Attorney-General
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • April 3, 1933
    ... ... States v. Mississippi, 12 S. & M. 456; Enos v ... Smith, 7 S. & M. 85; Neal v. Wellson, 12 S. & ... M. 649; Vance v. McConnell, Walker 254; Byrd v ... State, 1 How. 163; Coleman v. Saunders, 5 H ... 287; Lewis v. Garrett, 5 H. 434; DeMoss v ... Camp, 5 H. 516; Ayer v ... State, 39 Tex. 149; ... Gallop v. Smith, 154 Ind. 196, 56 N.E. 443; ... Gallop v. Smith, 183 U.S. 300, 46 L.Ed. 207; ... Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90, 23 L.Ed. 678; ... Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U.S. 97, 24 L.Ed. 616; ... Spencer v. Merchant, 125 U.S. 345, 31 L.Ed. 763; 8 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 books & journal articles
  • "incorporation" of the Criminal Procedure Amendments: the View from the States
    • United States
    • University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Law Review No. 84, 2021
    • Invalid date
    ...Amendment does not "incorporate" Second Amendment right to bear arms or First Amendment right to freely assemble); Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90, 92 (1875) (finding that the Fourteenth Amendment does not "incorporate" Seventh Amendment right to civil jury trial). 27. Chicago, Burlington an......
  • CHAPTER 15
    • United States
    • Full Court Press Zalma on Property and Casualty Insurance
    • Invalid date
    ...to the settled course of judicial proceedings. Due process of law is process due according to the law of the land.” Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90, 92-93 (1876) (emphasis added; citation omitted). Not until Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884), however, did the Court significantly ela......
  • Medical Malpractice as Workers' Comp: Overcoming State Constitutional Barriers to Tort Reform
    • United States
    • Emory University School of Law Emory Law Journal No. 67-5, 2018
    • Invalid date
    ...natural justice, it is not unreasonable . . . .").319. Id. at 205-06.320. Id. at 206.321. Id. at 207-08 (first citing Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90 (1875); then citing Frank v. Magnum, 237 U.S. 309, 340 (1915)).322. Id. at 208 (citing Mo., Kan., & Tex. Ry. v. Cade, 233 U.S. 642, 650 (1914)......
  • Bankruptcy - Robert B. Chapman
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 53-4, June 2002
    • Invalid date
    ...U.S. 46, 53 (1947); Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78, 99 (1908). 171. Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937). 172. Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90 (1875). 173. Snowden v. Hughes, 321 U.S. 1 (1944). 174. Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886). 175. Bradwell v. Illinois, 83 U.S. 130 (18......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT