Louisiana House Bill HB60

Louisiana 2014 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/10/14
• Refer: 3/10/14

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against DOTD in the matter of "Keith Phillips v. Pattie K. Inzenga, et al" consolidated with "Robert H. Fuqua, et al v. City-Parish of Baton Rouge"

Impact

The passage of HB 60 signifies the state's recognition of legal responsibilities stemming from court decisions. Appropriating the amount of $30,630 addresses the financial repercussions of legal claims against the DOTD and facilitates compliance with the judicial orders. This action underscores the importance of judicial rulings in guiding state expenditure, ensuring that such financial outlays are provided for in a timely manner to uphold the rule of law and maintain the integrity of the state's commitments.

Summary

House Bill 60 is an appropriations bill that focuses on allocating funds from the General Fund of Louisiana for the fiscal year 2014-2015. The specific aim of the bill is to authorize the payment of a consent judgment against the Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) in the case titled 'Keith Phillips v. Pattie K. Inzenga, et al', which is consolidated with 'Robert H. Fuqua, et al v. City-Parish of Baton Rouge'. The bill provides the necessary financial resources to meet this legal obligation, thereby formalizing the state's commitment to pay the judgment awarded by the court.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 60 is predominantly procedural, as it revolves around fulfilling a financial obligation resulting from legal proceedings. Since the bill deals with appropriations for a consent judgment, there has been little vocal opposition, as the funds are meant to settle a court-ordered payment. Legislators are generally supportive of measures that fulfill legal judgments, reflecting a commitment to uphold the judicial system and avoid further legal complications for the state, thus maintaining a responsible governance approach.

Contention

While there doesn't appear to be significant contention related to HB 60 given its nature as an appropriations bill, there is an implicit recognition of the overarching financial implications such judgments may have on the state budget. Appropriating funds to settle legal judgments can prompt discussions about the adequacy of oversight and management within state departments, particularly in the DOTD, to avoid similar financial liabilities in the future. Such underlying concerns regarding accountability and regulatory compliance may be notable for stakeholders concerned with state fiscal health.