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

La. Rev. Stat. § 18:494 (2026)

Effect of sustaining an objection to candidacy

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

494. Effect of sustaining an objection to candidacy

           A. Disqualification. Except as provided in Subsection B of this Section, when an objection to candidacy is sustained on any of the grounds provided for in R.S. 18:492, the final judgment shall disqualify the defendant as a candidate in the primary election for that office.

           B. Withdrawal. When an objection to candidacy is sustained on the ground that the defendant is prohibited by law from becoming a candidate for one or more of the offices for which he qualified in the primary election, the final judgment shall order the defendant to remove the grounds for the objection by withdrawing from the primary election for one or more of the offices. If the defendant fails to comply with this judgment within twenty-four hours after it becomes definitive, the court shall render judgment disqualifying the defendant as a candidate for all of the offices for which he qualified in the primary election.

           Acts 1976, No. 697, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1978; Acts 2024, No. 390, §1, eff. August 1, 2024.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2023 · leading case: Louisiana State Bd. of Ethics v. Garrett, 929 So. 2d 176 (La. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Louisiana State Bd. of Ethics v. Garrett, 929 So. 2d 176 (La. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “LSA — R.S. 18:494. While we find that Mr. Garrett should be disqualified from the election for his failure to pay the outstanding amounts due, we note that, as admitted by the Board, it did not object to the candidacy of a similarly situated party in a different election because…”
State, Bd. of Ethics v. Darby, 937 So. 2d 929 (La. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “R.S. 18:494, we find that the petition objecting to the candidacy should have been granted, disqualifying Mr.”
Russo v. Burns, 150 So. 3d 67 (La. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “R.S. 18:494 states the effect of sustaining an objection to candidacy as follows: A.”
Jackson v. Myer, 52 So. 3d 271 (La. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “Despite the plaintiffs’ characterization of this suit as one contesting an election, we find no error in the trial court’s determination that the | allegations of the plaintiffs’ petition are in actuality an objection to the candidacy of Myer. The petition clearly challenges…”
Louisiana Bd. of Ethics v. Wilson, 161 So. 3d 785 (La. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “R.S. 18:494 requiring that once the objection is sustained, “the final judgment shall disqualify the defendant as a candidate.”
State Bd. of Ethics v. Arnold, 184 So. 3d 60 (La. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 6× “R.S. 18:494 provides: A. Disqualification, When an objection to candidacy is sustained on the ground' that the defendant 'failed to qualify for the primary election in the manner prescribed by-law, that the defendant failed ■ to qualify for the primary election within the time…”
Dale v. Louisiana Sec'y of State, 971 So. 2d 1136 (La. Ct. App. 2007). “Moreover, although plaintiffs request that the names of any candidate qualifying during the reopened qualifying period be withdrawn, see LSA-R.S. 18:494, the petition does not name a candidate, nor has any candidate been served or given an opportunity to respond to the challenge.”
Russo v. Burns, 147 So. 3d 1111 (La. 2014). · cites it 2× “R.S. 18:494(A). 2 12At trial on September 2, 2014, Russo introduced correspondence to and from the Louisiana Department of Revenue (LDR) *1113 in which he requested Burns’s tax returns for 2008-2013, and LDR replied it had no tax returns on file for Burns for the years 2010-2013.”
Connick v. Shepherd, 176 So. 3d 1129 (La. Ct. App. 2015). “R.S. 18:494(A). We do not suggest that Mr.”
Graham v. Crawford, 176 So. 3d 1148 (La. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “R.S. 18:494 A. 4 From that judgment, Mr. Crawford appeals.”
LaCombe v. McKeithen, 887 So. 2d 48 (La. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “" LSA-R.S. 18:494(A). Section 494(B) further specifies that when an objection to candidacy is sustained on the ground that the defendant is prohibited by law from becoming a candidate for one or more of the offices for which he qualified in the primary election, the final…”
North v. Doucet, 253 So. 3d 815 (La. Ct. App. 2018). “R.S. 18:494(A). At trial on July 26, 2018, 4 Mr.”
Show all 21 citing cases →
La. Rev. Stat. § 18:494(A): 11 cases
Russo v. Burns, 147 So. 3d 1111 (La. 2014). “R.S. 18:494(A). 2 12At trial on September 2, 2014, Russo introduced correspondence to and from the Louisiana Department of Revenue (LDR) *1113 in which he requested Burns’s tax returns for 2008-2013, and LDR replied it had no tax returns on file for Burns for the years 2010-2013.”
Russo v. Burns, 150 So. 3d 67 (La. Ct. App. 2014). “R.S. 18:494 states the effect of sustaining an objection to candidacy as follows: A.”
Connick v. Shepherd, 176 So. 3d 1129 (La. Ct. App. 2015). “R.S. 18:494(A). We do not suggest that Mr.”
State, Bd. of Ethics v. Darby, 937 So. 2d 929 (La. Ct. App. 2006). “R.S. 18:494, we find that the petition objecting to the candidacy should have been granted, disqualifying Mr.”
North v. Doucet, 253 So. 3d 815 (La. Ct. App. 2018). “R.S. 18:494(A). At trial on July 26, 2018, 4 Mr.”
La. Rev. Stat. § 18:494(B): 3 cases
LaCombe v. McKeithen, 887 So. 2d 48 (La. Ct. App. 2004). “" LSA-R.S. 18:494(A). Section 494(B) further specifies that when an objection to candidacy is sustained on the ground that the defendant is prohibited by law from becoming a candidate for one or more of the offices for which he qualified in the primary election, the final…”
State Bd. of Ethics v. Arnold, 184 So. 3d 60 (La. Ct. App. 2015). “R.S. 18:494 provides: A. Disqualification, When an objection to candidacy is sustained on the ground' that the defendant 'failed to qualify for the primary election in the manner prescribed by-law, that the defendant failed ■ to qualify for the primary election within the time…”
Richard v. Netterville, 493 So. 2d 241 (La. Ct. App. 1986).
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.