Here’s a previous thread on the topic, but it isn’t exactly clear what the practical effect is.
How does the fact that Lousiana has a Civil Law based system as opposed to a (British) Common Law based system effect day to day life? I can’t imagine that the answer is murder is legal, plaintiffs are required to have sex with the judge in order to file a case, and evidence can be deemed inadmissible by the other side challenging and winning a game of rock-paper-scissors, but is the difference all theoretical now? What are the major substantive and procedural differences that a person moving from San Antonio to New Orleans would likely encounter?
As someone pointed out, “Civil Code” in France means the whole legal system. If Louisiana is like Quebec (same idea, former French jurisdiction) then likely civil law, as in lawsuits etc., is managed in the same way, same precedents as France.
For example, one item I read said that Quebec until recently did not have the concept (in English common law) of a “common law marriage”. Another example, the parents of a husband used to be liable to support the daughter-in-law and grandchildren. Everything you think you know about the law - contracts, family law,wills, etc - will be subtly different.
Of course, each change in the law makes the local laws that much more different from France, so they are unique.
I live in La. As a practical matter, the only thing I have seen is that no lawyer outside of La., including my brother, will hazard a guess on civil law matters here. La. reputation is apparently pretty strong. But on the inside, even when dealing with La. legal issues, I don’t think there is any real difference. My local lawyer friends point out that almost all the special cases unique to La. law have been adjusted to conform to the rest of the US. There are some special issues regarding inheritance here, but from what I am told not enough any more to make the state unique. That said, I am sure there are lots of little nuggets left over. I am sure it makes for interesting conversation among the law professors in Baton Rouge. Again, in day to day life-hardly any.
Based on my dealings with the various European civil law systems, I’ve often wondered if notaries are the Big Deal in Louisiana that they are in (non-UK) Europe. It seems like every time I have European security documents, the notary is a major issue–they have to independently sign off on the documents, they’re only available at certain times, if one of the parties isn’t going to have an actual representative there to sign you have to jump through hoops to get a power of attorney set up… all a pain, particularly compared to the rather perfunctory role of notaries here.
Fun fact (which at least was true in 2001, when I visited): the Louisiana Supreme Court is the only state supreme court to have two official courthouses - one in Baton Rouge, and one in Nawlins.
I’m not sure if this is the case. IAAL, but one who attended a common-law law school and who practices in a common-law jurisdiction. Still, I do know a bit, and it is my understanding that civil law does not use precedents in the way common-law systems do; and in any case, Quebec does not use precedents from France.
I believe we have one or two Dopers who have civil law degrees. Perhaps they can address this point?
could still be. But they rennovated the NO courthouse and that is where they hang out most of the time.
When they aren’t being sued. The rest of the justices are objecting to letting the only black justice assume the chief judge position. According to the constitution, the senior judge is the chief judge. Not everyone counts the years the same way. Sigh.
No, in France, the Civil Code is simply one part of the law. There is a separate penal code, as well as separate administrative law systems.
The wiki article on Louisiana law looks like a good starting point for the OP. For instance, the concept of precedent is different in a civil law system. In the common law system, a precedent from a higher court binds the lower courts. In the Louisiana system, it looks like the concept of “jurisprudence constante” is followed - courts aren’t bound by precedent in the common law sense, but if the courts have consistently taken the same approach to the same issue over a lengthy period, courts will not be easily persuaded to depart from that interpretation, because of the duty to provide a stable legal system.
There are also differences in the substantive law in the common law and civil law systems. If the OP is interested, there is a previous thread on this issue: Diff between common and civil law.
My understanding is that contracts, property, and estates are the big areas where Louisiana law is significantly different from the rest of the states. It’s also the only state that has not adopted the full version of the Uniform Commercial Code.
The Ohio Supreme Court gets around the state twice a year for off-site oral arguments, but it - like the California court - has only one official home. Not so Louisiana.
I thought there were two Supreme Court locations (one in BR and one in NO) so that all the family members of the judges with financial interest in a case, some of whom are in-laws and State Legislators, could get the routine stuff out of the way in BR. When they try and fix the case in their favor, they do so in New Orleans so they can celebrate with a good meal and lots of drinks. I could be wrong, though.
One definite difference from Quebec is that in Canada criminal law is federal (although criminal prosecution is carried out by the province, which occasionally had meant that the local prosecutor could effectively nullify the law–e.g. on abortion before it was legalized). But all family law, real estate law, etc. is based on the old French code, effectively going back to the Roman code. Notaries are not just minor officials who certify signatures, but a kind of specialized lawyer, concentrating on real estate and family laws. Wills are made by notaries and, if registered with them, need not be probated.
Whether any of this applies to LA, I know not. Quebec was under the pre-Napoleanic code, but LA might have been governed by the Napoleanic code, which was different again.
There wasn’t a pre-Napoleanic code in France. There were a variety of local legal systems, based ultimately on the Roman civil law and the Code of Justinian (which was not a code in the modern sense). However, the local legal systems also had considerable variety, often traceable to the customary law in place in the area, and the accretions due to feudalism and laws passed by local authorities. Napoleon introduced his Code to bring all of France under a single legal system, based primarily on Roman law.
Quebec did not have a code until 1866. Prior to that, its law was based on the coutûme de Paris, the local law governing Paris. I think, but am not sure, that all of the French colonies in the New World, such as Quebec, Acadia and Louisiana, relied on the coutûme de Paris.
In 1866, the Parliament of the Province of Canada passed the Civil Code of Lower Canada, which introduced codification to Quebec for the first time. That Code was repealed in 1991, replaced with the Civil Code of Québec.