New Orleans Co v. State of Louisiana City of New Orleans

Decision Date04 March 1895
Docket NumberNo. 29,29
Citation15 S.Ct. 581,39 L.Ed. 679,157 U.S. 219
PartiesNEW ORLEANS C. & L. R. CO. v. STATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

This was an application filed by the city of New Orleans, in the civil district court for the parish of Orleans, for a writ of mandamus to compel the New Orleans City & Lake Railroad Company to perform certain contract obligations in reference to keeping streets, pavements, etc., in good repair. The writ was granted, and made peremptory, as prayed. On a writ of error to the supreme court of Louisiana, the judgment was modified and affirmed. 7 South. 606. The respondent brought error to this court.

George Denegre and Walter D. Denegre, for plaintiff in error.

E. A. O'Sullivan, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice HARLAN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the court.

By the first section of an act of the general assembly of Louisiana, approved July 12, 1888, and entitled 'An act providing a summary remedy against corporations to compel a compliance with certain obligations and contracts with municipal corporations, and providing ways and means to enforce said remedy,' it was provided that 'in all cases where any corporation has heretofore contracted with, or may hereafter contract with, or shall be otherwise legally bound to any parish or municipal corporation in this state, with reference to the paving, grading, repairing, reconstructing, or care of any street, highway, bridge, culvert, levee, canal, ditch, or crossing, and shall fail or neglect to perform said contract or obligation, the said parish or municipal corporation, or any officer thereof, or any five taxpayers thereof, shall have the right to proceed by a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of said contract or obligation, or any part thereof, which writ of mandamus shall be made returnable in five days, shall be tried by preference over all other cases, without a jury, in vacation as well as in term time, and in case of appeal shall be tried by preference in the appellate court.'

The second section provided that 'in case any corporation shall fail or neglect to comply satisfactorily with any judgment against it in such a proceeding within the time therein fixed (which time shall be fixed by the court at such period within which the work can be reasonably done), it shall be the duty of the court, on contradictory motion and proof taken in the same case, to issue a writ of distringas against said company, and to order the sheriff to do the work required to be done, and to apply the revenues and property of said company to defray the expenses incurred in executing the judgment of the court.'

The third section repeals all laws and parts of laws contrary to the provisions of that act.

The state of Louisiana, on the relation of the city of New Orleans,—evidently proceeding under the above act,—filed a petition in the civil district court, parish of Orleans, against the New Orleans City & Lake Pailroad Company, in which it was alleged, among other things:

That under the terms of certain contracts and ordinances, whereby the defendant was operating the Levee & Barracks, Camp & Prytania, Camp & Magazine, Rampart & Dauphine, Canal Street, Metaric Roa & Bayou St. John, the Esplanade & Bayou Bridge Lines, and the steam-railway to the lake, the New Orleans City & Lake Railroad Company was 'bound and obligated, among other things, to keep the paved and unpaved streets through which its tracks pass, as well as all the bridges on said streets, in good repair and condition, from curb to curb, during the continuance of its franchise and right of way; to raise, repair, and repave and and all intersections of streets, when required by relator, upon lines and levels to be furnished by the city surveyor; to widen and deepen any and all culverts and sluices to such dimensions as may be required and directed by the city surveyor; to keep in repair all bridges, and to make new ones, when required by relator, on all streets through which its lines pass; to pave, on all unpaved streets through which its lines pass the lines of said tracks, within the rails, with either round stones, or with four by five inch scantling, in the best workman like manner; and to plank the space between the lines of the track and the gutters of the streets with yellow pine planks three inches thick, laid on stringers four inches thick by eight inches wide; and to use flat rails for its tracks; and to keep its tracks in repair and good condition. That by the terms of the said contracts, acts, and ordinances under which it is operating the extension of the Camp & Prytania Line and the extension of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • Home Building Loan Ass v. Blaisdell
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 8 Enero 1934
    ...S.Ct. 304, 27 L.Ed. 977; Hill v. Merchants' Insurance Co., 134 U.S. 515, 10 S.Ct. 589, 33 L.Ed. 994; New Orleans City & Lake R.R. Co. v. Louisiana, 157 U.S. 219, 15 S.Ct. 581, 39 L.Ed. 679; Red River Valley Bank v. Craig, 181 U.S. 548, 21 S.Ct. 703, 45 L.Ed. 994; Wilson v. Standefer, 184 U.......
  • State ex rel. Malott v. Bd. of Com'Rs of Cascade Cnty.
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 23 Enero 1931
    ...v. Whitehead, 16 Wall. 314, 21 L. Ed. 357;Tennessee v. Sneed, 96 U. S. 69, 24 L. Ed. 610; Railroad v. [Louisiana ex rel.] New Orleans, 157 U. S. 219, 15 S. Ct. 581, 39 L. Ed. 679;Seibert v. Lewis, 122 U. S. 284, 7 S. Ct. 1190, 30 L. Ed. 1161.” These cases, and others, but serve to illustrat......
  • State v. Board of Com'rs of Cascade County
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 23 Enero 1931
    ... ... also Louisiana v. New Orleans, 102 U.S. 203, 26 ... L.Ed. 132; Louisiana ex rel ... 363, 205 P. 964, 967, ... citing Bowen v. Detroit City" Railway Co., 54 Mich ... 496, 20 N.W. 559, 52 Am. Rep. 822 ...    \xC2" ... ...
  • Colby v. City of Medford
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • 19 Septiembre 1917
    ... ... of the laws of the state of Oregon or the city charter of ... the city of Medford, or not ... Kearzey, 96 U.S. 595, 24 L.Ed. 793. In Louisiana v ... New Orleans, 102 U.S. 203, 206, 26 [85 Or. 523] L.Ed ... ...
  • 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