Mareau v. Tonry 339 So.2d 3 339 So.2d 3 (Cite as: 339 So.2d 3) Page 3 free expression of their will, it will decree the nullity of the entire election . . .' See Garrison v. Connick, La., 291 So.2d 778 (1974); Dowling v. Orleans Parish Democratic Committee, 235 La. 62, 102 So.2d 755 (1958); Lewis v. Democratic Executive Committee, 232 La. 732, 95 So.2d 292 (1957). I subscribe to the opinion of the Court of Appeal that the present case falls within the rule. See, La.App., 338 So.2d 791 (1976). As found by the Court of Appeal, the frauds and irregularities included forgery, multiple voting, voting in the name of deceased persons, and the voting of persons without supporting precinct registers. These frauds and irregularities were both systematic and flagrant. They infected far more votes than the vote margin between the two competing candidates. This means that the voters have been deprived of the free expression of their will, because the outcome of the election cannot be determined. As the Court of Appeal aptly stated: *6 'These fraudulent practices cannot be condoned under any circumstances and must be ferreted out if we are to insure that the free and honest expression of the will of the electorate is reflected in the democratic process.' For the reasons assigned, I respectfully dissent. 339 So.2d 3 END OF DOCUMENT © 2006 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 343