Louisiana House Bill HB363

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/29/10
• Refer: 3/29/10

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Kaye Frances Willis v. State of La., DOTD"

Impact

The approval and implementation of HB 363 would represent a direct financial commitment from the state to address legal obligations arising from the judgment in the case of Kaye Frances Willis v. State of Louisiana, DOTD. This could set a precedent for how similar judgments are handled in the future and ensure that the state's financial responsibilities towards settlements are fulfilled. By addressing such judgments promptly, the legislation underscores the importance of funding legal mandates and could potentially impact the administration of the state's budget by allocating specific funds for litigation outcomes.

Summary

House Bill 363 is a piece of legislation proposed by Representative Fannin that aims to appropriate funds from the state general fund for the fiscal year 2010-2011. Specifically, the bill allocates a total of $20,064 to be paid to Kaye Frances Willis and her attorney as a consent judgment in a legal matter involving the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD). This appropriation is intended to satisfy a judgment that was issued by the Eighth Judicial District Court in Winn Parish, Louisiana.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding the bill appears to be neutral as it primarily involves the appropriations process and execution of a court judgment. There are likely to be supporters who see the necessity of fulfilling legal obligations to uphold the rule of law and instill public confidence in governmental procedures. Conversely, funding allocations from the state general fund might raise questions regarding budget priorities, especially in light of competing needs and other funding requests in the legislative process.

Contention

Although HB 363 seems straightforward, there are underlying implications regarding state funds management and the responsibility of government entities in legal matters. As it addresses a specific case, some legislators may voice concerns about the appropriateness of using state funds for such payments, while others may argue for the need to protect the state's integrity by adhering to judicial decisions. Future discussions may revolve around how such legal judgments are financed, and whether similar cases will require similar appropriations.