- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
St. George update - La. SC denies City of BR's writ application in annexation case
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:42 pm
Trial Court held Browning and Rials had the right of action to challenge the post 2019 annexation in December 2024 (also held City of St. George did not have procedural capacity).
1st Circuit denied writs in September and La. SC denied writs today.
So... GAME ON BITCHES!
1st Circuit denied writs in September and La. SC denied writs today.
So... GAME ON BITCHES!
This post was edited on 12/16/25 at 3:45 pm
6
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:44 pm to udtiger
Can you give a little more context. Who was suing who? Was this the city suing St George (Browning/Rials) or the other way around?
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:45 pm to udtiger
So the St George map just got a little bigger?
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:45 pm to udtiger
Those losers in Baton Rouge still at it with this? Why hasn’t Sid Edwards withdrawn all their challenges to St. George.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:46 pm to Giantkiller
Browning/Rials are StG OGs. They sued City of BR over the annexations since the 2019 vote (as well as all taxes collected since for those properties).
This post was edited on 12/16/25 at 2:46 pm
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:46 pm to The Boat
quote:
Those losers in Baton Rouge still at it with this? Why hasn’t Sid Edwards withdrawn all their challenges to St. George.
Based on OP, you have it backwards. StG is trying to take areas that requested to be annexed into BTR.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:47 pm to Kramer26
quote:
So the St George map just got a little bigger?
It has stayed the same.
If anything, when the dust settles the City of BR's will be smaller.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:48 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Based on OP, you have it backwards. StG is trying to take areas that requested to be annexed into BTR.
No.
They were in St.G as of the vote. No longer unincorporated areas. Big no no.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:52 pm to udtiger
TLDR, from what I understand
1. St. George residents vote to incorporate
2. BR politicians sue to stop it but they lose
3. BR politicians convince big businesses to “leave” St George and be annexed into BR proper
4. St. George sues to prevent them from “leaving”
5. Circuit court says St. George is right
6. BR appeals to Supreme Court
7. Supreme Court says St. George is right
(You are here)
1. St. George residents vote to incorporate
2. BR politicians sue to stop it but they lose
3. BR politicians convince big businesses to “leave” St George and be annexed into BR proper
4. St. George sues to prevent them from “leaving”
5. Circuit court says St. George is right
6. BR appeals to Supreme Court
7. Supreme Court says St. George is right
(You are here)
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:52 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Based on OP, you have it backwards. StG is trying to take areas that requested to be annexed into BTR.
Article says that they were part of St. George as of the vote to incorporate. BR annexing what was already incorporated is the argument.
This post was edited on 12/16/25 at 2:53 pm
Posted on 12/16/25 at 2:53 pm to udtiger
quote:
They were in St.G as of the vote. No longer unincorporated areas. Big no no.
So they're back in SG. Let me ask you this - can they apply for re-annexation now or are they shite out of luck? My guess is that if they can, many will not because it was all a bunch of stupid, bullshite flexing. Now they realize how much of a shitshow BR and I'd assume most will be like "Nah, we're good here..."
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:04 pm to udtiger
quote:
No.
They were in St.G as of the vote. No longer unincorporated areas. Big no no.
Yes. I was responding to a poster saying BR was still "challenging" StG. It isn't. These areas are part of BR now. StG is "challenging" to take them. You're free to believe StG is correct on the merits, but that doesn't change the posture of the litigants.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:05 pm to udtiger
They fight tooth and nail to keep St George from incorporating itself. Almost like the gravy train is leaving the station.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:05 pm to Giantkiller
quote:
So they're back in SG. Let me ask you this - can they apply for re-annexation now or are they shite out of luck? My guess is that if they can, many will not because it was all a bunch of stupid, bullshite flexing. Now they realize how much of a shitshow BR and I'd assume most will be like "Nah, we're good here..."
There is a process by which a part of one city can seek to unincorporate from the city it's in and then, if successful, can then petition to be annexed.
But in that process, the City they are in can oppose it/defeat it (by, for example, showing that it would be harmed by the departure [tax revenue]).
In essence, the argument the City of BR made against StG, but which was bullshite because despite the propaganda, those areas were NEVER part of the City of Baton Rouge (St.G wasnt "seceding" from BR). These areas would be trying to secede from St.G.
This post was edited on 12/16/25 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:06 pm to Joshjrn
Those companies trying to stay in Baton Rouge are not gonna be happy with less favorable taxing by St George
Will see how all that plays out
Will see how all that plays out
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:07 pm to Giantkiller
The dispute is over an area off Essen/United Plaza and around the Woman’s Hospital campus. BTR annexed them after the vote but before SG had the capacity to challenge the annexations.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:07 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
These areas are part of BR now.
That is in dispute.
If St.G is correct (and they are) the annexations are null. Thus, St.G is not "taking" them.
This post was edited on 12/16/25 at 3:09 pm
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:07 pm to Giantkiller
not 100% on this but I don't think cities can annex other cities in this fashion. What's happened to BR was unincorporated areas decided to form their own city.
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:10 pm to udtiger
quote:
That is in dispute.
If St.G is correct (and they are) the annexations are null. Thus, St.G is not "taking" them.
Sure. Not responsive to what I said. I was responding to Boat's post which said this:
quote:
Those losers in Baton Rouge still at it with this? Why hasn’t Sid Edwards withdrawn all their challenges to St. George.
Is it not objectively false to say that Edwards is "challenging" StG on this? Is it not objectively true to say that StG is "challenging" BR on this?
Posted on 12/16/25 at 3:12 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
quote:
Those losers in Baton Rouge still at it with this? Why hasn’t Sid Edwards withdrawn all their challenges to St. George.
Is it not objectively false to say that Edwards is "challenging" StG on this? Is it not objectively true to say that StG is "challenging" BR on this?
Yes.
Just like if someone stole my car and I was suing them to get it back, I would be "challenging" the thief.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News