State ex rel. Porterie v. Walmsley
Decision Date | 10 July 1935 |
Docket Number | 33419,33447,33246,33251 |
Citation | 162 So. 826,183 La. 139 |
Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
Parties | STATE ex rel. PORTERIE, Atty. Gen., et al. v. WALMSLEY, Mayor, et al |
O'NIELL, C. J., adheres to his dissenting opinion. ODOM J., dissents from the refusal to grant a rehearing. ROGERS J., dissents from the refusal to grant a rehearing.
Generally, decisions of this court involving an interpretation of the 'home rule' clauses in the various Constitutions of this state have varied in strict conformity with either the omission, enlargement, or restriction of these clauses.
In the case of R. E. Diamond v. G. L. Cain, 21 La.Ann. 309, the court said, in upholding the right of the Governor to appoint, remove, and control officers and men of the police force of the city of New Orleans, as follows:
R. E. Diamond v. G. L. Cain, 21 La.Ann. 309, 319.
In State v. Kohnke, 109 La. 838, 33 So. 793, Mr. Justice Provosty made the following comments in differentiating certain cases which held contrary to the decision in the Kohnke Case, but which were decided under the 'home rule' clauses of the Constitution of 1879:
109 La. 838, 871, 33 So. 793, 806. (Quotation between brackets ours.)
In this same case, Mr. Justice Provosty thoroughly discussed articles 319 and 320 of the Constitution of 1898 as follows (109 La. 838, 868, 33 So. 793, 804):
'Another ground of unconstitutionality relied upon is that by articles 319 and 320 of the Constitution the officers charged with the exercise of the police power and with the administration of the affairs of the municipalities of the state must be chosen by election, and the members of boards or commissions must either be elected by the city councils or appointed by the mayors of such municipalities; and that said act of 1902 undertakes to make the commissioner of labor and statistics, three members of the board of commissioners of the Orleans Levee District, and one member of the board of commissioners of the port of New Orleans, all of whom are appointed by the Governor, members ex officio of the sewerage and water board.
'These articles of the Constitution read as follows: * * *
The ruling of the court in connection with these cases is that, since their rendition, the Constitution of 1898 has been adopted which contained an enlargement of the 'home rule clause' to such an extent that the city of New Orleans became charged with the entire exercise of the police power in connection with the operation of its affairs, including the affairs of the sewerage and water board.
The present case comes before this court under the Constitution of 1921 under which the 'home rule clause' was deliberately curtailed, and the enlargement of this clause contained in the Constitution of 1898 was completely obliterated, and consequently the decision follows the Police Board Case, the Dock Board Case, and the Drainage Commission Case mentioned above.
The following cases in the jurisprudence of Louisiana deal with certain phases of the decision in State v. Kohnke, 109 La. 838, 33 So. 793, but none of these cases deal with the question of membership of the sewerage and water board. A resume of these cases follows:
Saunders v. Board of Liquidation of City Debt, 110 La. 313, 34 So. 457. Judgment holds constitutional amendment relative to ratifying special tax levied in city of New Orleans as set out in Act No. 4 of 1899, Ex. Sess., was passed and adopted in full conformity with the Louisiana Constitution, and that said amendment was declared a part and parcel of the Louisiana Constitution.
State ex rel. Sewerage & Water Board v. Michel, Secretary of State, 127 La. 685, 53 So. 926, 928:
(Quotation between brackets ours.)
New Orleans Taxpayers' Ass'n v. Sewerage & Water Board, 132 La. 839, 61 So. 843 ( ):
'The property taxpayers of New Orleans petitioned for the levy of a special tax, to be devoted, among other purposes, 'to the construction * * * of a free sewerage system, with free water therefor.' Act No. 270 of 1908 authorizes the Sewerage & Water Board to fix the rate, to consumers, for such water as they may use 'for drinking and domestic purposes, exclusive of sewerage,' and the board has adopted rules fixing such rate, making a liberal allowance for water required for sewerage purposes. Hence neither the act nor the rules operate to impair the obligations of the contract between the city and the taxpayers; for the petition of the taxpayers stipulates, in effect, that only such water as may be required and used for the purposes of the sewerage system shall be free, and water required and used for other purposes, such as drinking, cooking, bathing, laundering, sprinkling, etc., and which goes into the free sewers only after those purposes have been served, does not fall within that stipulation. * * *
State v. Billhartz, 146 La. 855, 84 So. 120:
'That as it is proposed to have this act ratified by the Constitution, it is hereby specially declared to be the intent of this act, and of said ratifying constitutional amendment, that the General Assembly reserves the right to amend this act in any...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Nomey v. State, Through Edwards
...So. 587 (1935). Even the essential right of due process must yield to a proper exercise of the police power. State ex rel Porterie v. Walmsley, 183 La. 139, 162 So. 826 (1935). Whether a law is local or special is determined by equal protection arguments and they are not for that reason alo......
-
Board of Com'rs of Orleans Levee Dist. v. Department of Natural Resources
...v. Alford, supra; City of Shreveport v. Kansas City Southern R. Co. 193 La. 277, 190 So. 404, 407 (1939); State ex rel. Porterie v. Walmsley, 183 La. 139, 162 So. 826, 837 (1935); State v. City of New Orleans, 151 La. 24, 91 So. 533 (1922). Consequently, the legislature's prior delegation o......
-
City of New Orleans v. Board of Com'rs of Orleans Levee Dist.
...Life Ins. Co. v. Martin, 223 La. 583, 66 So.2d 511 (1953); Fernandez v. Alford, 203 La. 111, 13 So.2d 483 (1943); Porterie v. Walmsley, 183 La. 139, 162 So. 826 (1935); Shreveport v. Kansas City, S & G. Ry. Co., 167 La. 771, 120 So. 290, 62 A.L.R. 1512 (1929). Because the police power is in......
-
Orleans Parish School Bd. v. Pittman Const. Co.
...162 So.2d 555 (1964); Leiter Minerals, Inc . v. California Co., 241 La. 915, 132 So.2d 845 (1961); State ex rel . Porterie v. Walmsley, 183 La. 139, 162 So. 826 (1935); Long v. Northeast Soil Conservation District of La., 226 La. 824, 828, 77 So .2d 408 (1954); Harris v. Monroe Building & L......