Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Summerell v. Phillips, 282 So. 2d 450.

21 citing documents.

City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge v. Myers 145 So. 3d 320 La. 2014
Moretco, Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish Council 112 So. 3d 287 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
public health, public safety or general welfare” is unconstitutional and invalid because it “fail[ed] to prescribe uniform rules or standards to guide the City Council”); (zoning ordinance requiring adoption of an ordinance to create a special zone for a mobile home or trailer park but which provides no objective standards to City-Parish Council is unconstitutional); (ordinance respecting issuance of a spec
Olde Nawlins Cookery, L.L.C. v. Edwards 38 So. 3d 1012 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
(an ordinance that gave full discretion to a zoning authority to vary the classifications in the special district there set up, but provided no criteria for the exercise of that power, held unconstitutional).
Roudakis v. City of Ruston 927 So. 2d 1231 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
Plaintiffs cited a number of cases to support their contention that the variances were granted in error: Tiber Petroleum, McCauley v. Albert E. Briede & Son, 231 La.
Jenkins v. St. Tammany Parish Police Jury 736 So. 2d 1287 La. 1999
King v. Caddo Parish Com'n 719 So. 2d 410 La. 1998
Bailey v. Parish of Caddo 716 So. 2d 523 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Morton v. Jefferson Parish Council, supra ; (La.
Jenkins v. St. Tammany Parish Police Jury 716 So. 2d 897 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
INTER URBAN BAR ASS'N, INC. v. City of New Orleans 652 So. 2d 1038 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
City of New Orleans v. Rasmussen 542 So. 2d 13 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
to allege that the ordinance is unconstitutionally vague.
Lozes v. Waterson 513 So. 2d 1155 La. 1987
this court found an ordinance unconstitutional where the ordinance allowed mobile home parks in areas zoned for other purposes, but the ordinance contained no objective standards for establishment of such mobile home districts.
Kiser v. Parish of Jefferson 498 So. 2d 115 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
1982) and the prior Supreme Court cases cited therein; i.e., Tiber Petroleum, and Gaudet v. Economical Super Market, Inc., 237 La.
Elliott v. East Carroll Parish Police Jury 421 So. 2d 1196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1982
Plaintiff counters the jury’s assertion that mandamus is inappropriate in these proceedings by contending that the ordinance procedure is unconstitutional, allows the use of mandamus as “the proper type of proceeding to test the constitutionality of a public body’s permit procedure.” Actually it was Summerell v. Phillips, 258 La.
Morton v. Jefferson Parish Council 419 So. 2d 431 La. 1982
Folsom Rd. Civic Ass'n v. Par. of St. Tammany 407 So. 2d 1219 La. 1981
Tiber Petroleum, Inc. v. Parish of Jefferson 391 So. 2d 1178 La. 1980
Kirk v. Town of Westlake 387 So. 2d 1157 La. 1980
This case was consolidated for argument with Baehr, as the two involve the same issue: (La.
Baehr v. City of Lake Charles 387 So. 2d 1160 La. 1980
the court below found the situation in that case to be the same as the one herein and held that two sections of the ordinance involved were constitutionally invalid.
Clarco Pipeline Co. v. Parish of East Baton Rouge 383 So. 2d 1296 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Cook v. Metropolitan Shreveport Bd. of App. 339 So. 2d 1225 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
State, Dept. of Hwys. v. Lamar Adv. Co. of La., Inc. 304 So. 2d 779 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
The district court relied on the case of Summerell v. Phillips, La., (1973).