Louisiana House Bill HB789

Louisiana 2015 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/21/15
• Refer: 4/22/15

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Angela Harris, et al v. State of Louisiana, DOTD"

Impact

The success of HB 789 means that the state will allocate specific funds to cover judgments, thus ensuring compliance with judicial orders. By appropriating these funds, the bill indicates the Legislative body's commitment to addressing legal liabilities stemming from state actions or omissions. Such appropriations, while routine, can affect future budgeting decisions and financial planning within the state by highlighting the cost of legal settlements related to the state's departments.

Summary

House Bill 789, introduced by Representative Hoffmann during the 2015 Regular Session, primarily addresses the appropriation of funds from the state general fund for the fiscal year 2015-2016. The bill earmarks a specific amount of $150,000 to satisfy a consent judgment awarded in the case of 'Angela Harris, et al v. State of Louisiana, DOTD'. This case concludes a legal dispute involving claims against the state's Department of Transportation and Development, reflecting the state's obligation to settle legal judgments as a part of maintaining the integrity and accountability of state operations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding the bill is generally neutral, as it deals with a specific administrative function—the payment of legal judgments. However, there may be underlying concerns among some constituents regarding the financial implications of such payments on the state's budget. The discussion surrounding HB 789 is likely to pivot on the broader implications of settling lawsuits, especially if it is perceived as resulting from mismanagement or negligence on the part of governmental agencies.

Contention

While the bill itself may not have sparked considerable public debate, it does raise questions about the financial mechanisms by which the state handles judicial judgments. In cases similar to that of HB 789, critics may voice concern over whether sufficient preventative measures are in place to avoid such outcomes, or whether the state's resources should be used for settlements that could be viewed as indicative of systemic issues. Ultimately, while HB 789 functions to implement a necessary financial obligation, it symbolizes ongoing tensions between state accountability and fiscal responsibility.