TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State ex rel. Fleming v. Joyce

STATE ex rel. FLEMING v. JOYCE, Registrar of Voters

State ex rel. Fleming v. Joyce, 54 So. 935 (La. 1911)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Louisiana · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 10, 1911
Docket
No. 18,744
Judges
Band
Citations
54 So. 935128 La. 4401911 La. LEXIS 580
Disposition
Affirmed.
Syllabus
(Syllabus by the Court.) Elections (§ 73*) — Residence or Voter — Temporary Absence. Temporary absence, necessitated by the calling of a voter, does not operate a change of his political residence. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Elections, Cent. Dig. §§ 69, 70; Dec. Dig. § 73.*]
Summary
Appeal from Tenth Judicial District Court. Parish of Concordia; John S. Boatner, Judge. Application by the State, on the relation of D. B. Fleming, for rule against John J. Joyce, Registrar of Voters, to erase the name of Charles E. Stingley from the rolls. From an order refusing the rule, relator appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Band

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

BAND, J.

This is a proceeding by rule to have the name of Charles E. Stingley erased from the registration rolls of the parish of Concordia, on the ground that he has not been an actual bona fide resident of the state, parish, and precinct for the time required by law. There was judgment for the defendant, and the relator has appealed. The issue is one of fact, and is narrowed down' to the question whether the defendant, a railroad man, is a resident of the town of Ferriday. On the evidence before us there can be no question that for three years prior to January 1, 1911, the defendant actually resided in Ferriday as much as his calling permitted. He had there a rented room, in which he slept every other night, and in which he kept his trunk and clothes. His payment of poll taxes showed his intent to fix his electoral residence in Ferriday. About January 1, 1911, the schedule of the train was changed, so that the defendant could no longer sleep in Ferriday. But he continued to keep his room and personal belongings in Ferriday, and recently spent three weeks there when he had a lay-off on account of sickness. The defendant’s enforced absence because of business reasons does not operate a change of residence. •

Judgment affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list