Louisiana House Bill HB1106

Louisiana 2014 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/31/14
• Refer: 4/1/14

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Gayla Bliss, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Lillian Christensen v. Michael Gesling, Lambourne Environmental Diving Service, LLC, Hammerberg Insurance Services, Inc. (D/B/A First Iowa Insurance Agency, Inc.) and State of Louisiana, through the DOTD"

Impact

The passing of this bill will have an immediate financial impact on the state budget, as it allocates funds from the general fund to cover legal settlements. Such appropriations can often reflect the fiscal health of the state and its willingness to meet legal obligations. While the bill itself may not alter existing laws significantly, it underscores the financial responsibilities of the government in providing redress for claims involving state agencies.

Summary

House Bill 1106 focuses on the appropriation of $15,000 from the state general fund for the fiscal year 2014-2015. This amount is designated for payment of a consent judgment arising from a lawsuit titled 'Gayla Bliss, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Lillian Christensen v. Michael Gesling, Lambourne Environmental Diving Service, LLC, Hammerberg Insurance Services, Inc. (D/B/A First Iowa Insurance Agency, Inc.) and State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and Development'. This judgment represents the financial obligation of the state as a result of the legal proceedings.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 1106 appears neutral, as it is primarily a procedural bill aimed at fulfilling a financial obligation rather than introducing new legislation or regulatory changes. There may not be significant opposition or support since its intent is straightforward – to pay a court-ordered settlement, which most lawmakers would agree is necessary. However, the broader implications of state expenditures on legal matters may raise discussions about fiscal management and legal liabilities in future sessions.

Contention

While there may not be overt points of contention within the discussions related to HB 1106, the context of its necessity could lead to debates concerning state liability and the management of legal claims against public agencies. The funding for such appropriations can draw scrutiny, as it reflects the state's legal and operational conduct, potentially leading to discussions on how similar judgments can be mitigated in the future.