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

La. Rev. Stat. § 18:1306 (2026)

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

§1306. Preparation and distribution of absentee by mail and early voting ballots

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1984–2020 · leading case: Adkins v. Huckabay, 755 So. 2d 206 (La. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Adkins v. Huckabay, 755 So. 2d 206 (La. 2000). · cites it 2× “R.S. 18:1306,:1309,:1310. Mr. Browne testified that during the counting of absentee ballots and after Mr.”
Leray v. Mullican, 456 So. 2d 1038 (La. Ct. App. 1984). “LSA R.S. 18:1306 provides in pertinent part as follows: 1306 A (2).”
Rushing v. Jupiter, 648 So. 2d 1 (La. Ct. App. 1994). “R.S. 18:1306 E(l)(f). The mere technicality that the deputy registrar may have signed the flap on the wrong line is of no moment.”
Harding v. Edwards (M.D. La. 2020). · cites it 2× “’”119 Again, though the OCA court applied Texas law, the Article III standing analysis nevertheless applies; as discussed above, Louisiana law contains the same reference to the Secretary of State as the “chief election officer” and, specifically in the emergency context, tasks…”
State v. Williams, 953 So. 2d 91 (La. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “R.S. 18:1306, as part of the Louisiana Election Code, is a more specific provision than the Civil Code articles that Defendant cites and is, therefore, controlling.”
Clark v. Edwards (M.D. La. 2020). “First, they seek declaratory relief, beginning with a declaration from this Court that the Excuse Requirement and the Witness Requirement violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States 9 La.”
— La. Rev. Stat. § 18:1306(E)(2) — 1 case
State v. Williams, 953 So. 2d 91 (La. Ct. App. 2007). “R.S. 18:1306, as part of the Louisiana Election Code, is a more specific provision than the Civil Code articles that Defendant cites and is, therefore, controlling.”
— La. Rev. Stat. § 18:1306(E)(2)(a) — 1 case
Clark v. Edwards (M.D. La. 2020). “First, they seek declaratory relief, beginning with a declaration from this Court that the Excuse Requirement and the Witness Requirement violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States 9 La.”
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.