Louisiana House Bill HB196

Louisiana 2013 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/8/13
• Refer: 4/8/13

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against the Department of Transportation and Development in the matter of "Donna Slate, et al v. Mattues Manual, et al"

Impact

The passage of HB 196 would impact state laws related to appropriations and the management of legal liabilities incurred by state departments. By explicitly appropriating funds for this purpose, the bill underscores the state's commitment to uphold legal judgments and manage their financial implications responsibly. This act could set a precedent for how future judgments against state departments are handled, potentially influencing subsequent fiscal policies regarding appropriations for litigation settlements.

Summary

House Bill 196 is a legislative bill aimed at appropriating funds to satisfy a consent judgment against the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) stemming from the court case 'Donna Slate, et al v. Mattues Manual, et al'. Specifically, the bill proposes the allocation of $10,000 from the state general fund for the fiscal year 2013-2014 to cover the financial obligations arising from this legal matter. This funding is crucial for ensuring that the state's departments can meet their legal and financial responsibilities without additional financial strain on other budgetary allocations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 196 appears generally neutral, as it primarily addresses a financial obligation rather than introducing new policy or regulatory changes. Since the bill focuses on fulfilling a judicial ruling, it has not attracted significant controversy. The discussions may reflect a consensus on the importance of meeting judicial judgments; however, the lack of extensive debate indicates that it is not a polarizing issue among lawmakers.

Contention

While there seems to be minimal contention regarding the provisions of HB 196, it nonetheless highlights important aspects concerning government accountability and transparency in dealing with legal settlements. The bill’s straightforward approach in addressing the funding for a consent judgment minimizes debate but emphasizes the need for fiscal responsibility within state governance. The magnitude of such payments can influence budget priorities, and the clarity in the judgment payment process is essential for maintaining public trust in government institutions.