Constitutional amendment to require reargument before a five judge panel prior to reversal or modification of judgments rendered by office of workers' compensation when one judge of the original 3-judge panel dissents. (2/3-CA13s1(A)) (EN NO IMPACT EX See Note)
Impact
The amendment would significantly impact how appeals in workers' compensation cases are handled in Louisiana. By mandating reargument before a five-judge panel in cases where dissent exists, the bill could lead to more thorough reviews of contested decisions. Proponents argue this would enhance the fairness and accuracy of judicial outcomes, ensuring that complex cases are evaluated comprehensively, thus protecting the interests of claimants seeking workers' compensation.
Summary
Senate Bill 42 proposes an amendment to Article V, Section 8(B) of the Louisiana Constitution, specifically addressing the appellate process in workers' compensation cases. The primary aim of the bill is to require that whenever a decision made by a district court or an administrative agency regarding a workers' compensation claim is modified or reversed, and there is a dissent from one of the three judges on the panel, the case must be reargued before a larger panel of at least five judges. This change intends to ensure that a sufficient majority of judges agree on judgments concerning such critical legal determinations.
Sentiment
Overall sentiment surrounding SB 42 appears to be cautiously positive among those who see the merit in improving judicial review processes. Supporters emphasize that the bill can reduce arbitrary or hasty decisions that could adversely affect workers. Critics, however, might express concerns about the potential for longer waits in resolution times due to additional hearings and the resource burden this could impose on the judiciary system.
Contention
Notable points of contention in discussions surrounding SB 42 could revolve around the implications it has for judicial efficiency versus thoroughness. Some legislators may argue that requiring a five-judge panel for rearguments could complicate and extend the appeal process, potentially delaying justice for claimants. The debate will likely focus on finding the balance between ensuring robust judicial review and maintaining an efficient court system, which can handle the volume of appeals effectively.
(Constitutional Amendment) Increases the number of associate supreme court justices and increases the required number of justices concurring in order to render judgment (OR SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)
Relating to orders and judgments rendered by associate judges in child support and child protection cases and to the investigation of child abuse and neglect.
Constitutional amendment to eliminate judge's discretion to grant bail for certain offenses after conviction but prior to sentencing. (2/3 - CA13s1(A))