La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 18:511 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

SUBPART F. ELECTION OF CANDIDATES

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 1978–2000 · leading case: Citizens for a Better Gretna v. City of Gretna, La., 636 F. Supp. 1113 (E.D. La. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Citizens for a Better Gretna v. City of Gretna, La., 636 F. Supp. 1113 (E.D. La. 1986). · cites it 3× “The gravamen of plaintiffs’ claim is that the “at-large” election system, together with the majority vote requirement for election to the Board of Aldermen (LSA-R.S. 18:511 A), currently employed by the City, effectively prevents blacks from participating in the political…”
Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67 (1997). “” La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18:511(A) (West Supp.”
Love v. Foster, 90 F.3d 1026 (5th Cir. 1996). · cites it 4× “” La. Rev.Stat. § 18:511(A). When the seat in Congress is filled in the October primary, no candidate’s name appears on the ballot in the November general election and no vote for that office can be cast on the federal election date.”
Cook v. Campbell, 360 So. 2d 1193 (La. Ct. App. 1978). “[3] LSA-R.S. 18:511 A.: "Majority vote. A candidate who receives a majority of the votes cast for an office in a primary election is elected.”
Soileau v. Bd. of Sup'rs, St. Martin Par., 361 So. 2d 319 (La. Ct. App. 1978). “18:469), nor will the primary election be decisive if the election results in a tie vote (LSA-R.S. 18:511). Additionally, the results of the September 16,1978 primary would be inconclusive if an election contest suit were filed, the results of the primary election being final…”
Steinhardt v. Batt, 753 So. 2d 928 (La. Ct. App. 2000). “R.S. 18:511. He additionally argues that, because this is a special election to fill an already vacant seat, the defendant would actually be able to assume office on that date.”
Jory v. Arnette, 360 So. 2d 921 (La. Ct. App. 1978). “18:469), nor will the primary election be decisive if the election results in a tie vote (LSA-R.S. 18:511). Additionally, the results of the September 16, 1978 primary would be inconclusive if an election contest suit were filed, the results of the primary election being final…”
Burks v. Lombard, 533 So. 2d 161 (La. Ct. App. 1988). “The First Circuit saw a conflict between this language and that of R.S. 18:511(A), which provides, in pertinent part: A.”
United States v. State of La., 952 F. Supp. 1151 (W.D. La. 1997). · cites it 2× “R.S. 18:511(B) (West 1996). The United States thereafter amended its complaint, recognizing that the issues raised by their original request for injunctive relief had become moot ( i.”
United States v. Louisiana, 952 F. Supp. 1151 (W.D. La. 1997). · cites it 2× “R.S. 18:511(B) (West 1996). The United States thereafter amended its complaint, recognizing that the issues raised by their original request for injunctive relief had become moot (i.”
Wayne v. Green, 389 So. 2d 104 (La. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “Finally, the trial court decreed, pursuant to R.S. 18:511, no candidate received a majority of the votes east for the office of School Board member, District 1, Seat A, Parish of Ascension, and, pursuant to R.”
Broussard v. Miller, 514 So. 2d 765 (La. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “18:469(A), LSA-R.S. 18:511(A), and Wayne v. Green, 389 So.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— La. Rev. Stat. § 18:511(A) — 7 cases
Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67 (1997). “” La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18:511(A) (West Supp.”
Love v. Foster, 90 F.3d 1026 (5th Cir. 1996). “” La. Rev.Stat. § 18:511(A). When the seat in Congress is filled in the October primary, no candidate’s name appears on the ballot in the November general election and no vote for that office can be cast on the federal election date.”
Burks v. Lombard, 533 So. 2d 161 (La. Ct. App. 1988). “The First Circuit saw a conflict between this language and that of R.S. 18:511(A), which provides, in pertinent part: A.”
Broussard v. Miller, 514 So. 2d 765 (La. Ct. App. 1987). “18:469(A), LSA-R.S. 18:511(A), and Wayne v. Green, 389 So.”
Wayne v. Green, 390 So. 2d 494 (La. 1980).
— La. Rev. Stat. § 18:511(B) — 2 cases
United States v. State of La., 952 F. Supp. 1151 (W.D. La. 1997). “R.S. 18:511(B) (West 1996). The United States thereafter amended its complaint, recognizing that the issues raised by their original request for injunctive relief had become moot ( i.”
United States v. Louisiana, 952 F. Supp. 1151 (W.D. La. 1997). “R.S. 18:511(B) (West 1996). The United States thereafter amended its complaint, recognizing that the issues raised by their original request for injunctive relief had become moot (i.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.