Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Melissa Maturin v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and Development, parish and/or City of New Iberia"
Impact
The passage of HB 305 has notable implications for the state's fiscal policies and how legal judgments are funded within the state government framework. By appropriating funds explicitly for court judgment payments, it reflects the state’s commitment to uphold legal obligations while managing budgetary appropriations effectively. This can set precedence for similar future appropriations where funds need to be allocated for judgments against the state, potentially affecting the state budget and funding allocations for other programs in the future.
Summary
House Bill 305, introduced by Representative Johnson, focuses on appropriating funds for the payment of a judgment in a specific legal case, 'Melissa Maturin v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and Development'. The bill authorizes the state to allocate a total of $13,695.09, comprising $12,500 for the judgment and an additional $1,195.09 for Medicaid reimbursement. Approval of this bill ensures that the state can fulfill its financial obligations resulting from the court's consent judgment, which is related to a legal claim involving the state and local governance in New Iberia, Louisiana.
Sentiment
Based on discussions surrounding the bill, the sentiment appears to be generally procedural, focusing on the necessary financial appropriations to comply with judicial rulings. There doesn't seem to be significant public or legislative contention noted with this specific bill, as it serves to fulfill a required payment rather than introduce new legislative measures or controversial policy changes.
Contention
While HB 305 does not present major points of contention in the legislative discourse, it may raise questions regarding fiscal responsibility and the handling of such appropriations in future cases. Lawmakers will need to ensure that the state's financial health is preserved while satisfying legal judgments. This bill may prompt discussions regarding mechanisms for funding judgments against the state in a manner that minimizes impact on other state-funded programs.
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Damien L. Davis and Rochelle Robinson Davis v. State of Louisiana through the Department of Transportation and Development and the City of New Orleans"
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Progressive Security Insurance Company as Subrogee of Quint Marceaux v. State of Louisiana, through the DOTD, the Parish of Iberia and the City of New Iberia"
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Truman D. Owens, Sr. v. State of Louisiana through the Department of Transportation and Development and ABC Construction Company"
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against the Department of Transportation and Development in the matter of "Jeremy LeBlanc v. Katrina M. Libersat, et al"
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Cristy A. Riordan v. Newlynne L. Herring and Allstate Insurance Company and the State of Louisiana, through the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development"
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against the Department of Transportation and Development in the matter of "James Brinson, Jr., et al v. State of Louisiana"
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Henrey Clark & Denise Ramsey v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and Development, Lafayette City Parish Consolidated Government"
Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Steven Melancon v. State of Louisiana through the Department of Transportation and Development, et al."