Louisiana House Bill HB493

Louisiana 2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/2/18
• Refer: 3/2/18
• Refer: 3/12/18
• Report Pass: 4/18/18
• Engrossed: 4/30/18
• Refer: 5/1/18
• Refer: 5/14/18
• Report Pass: 5/15/18
• Enrolled: 5/17/18
• Chaptered: 5/28/18
• Passed: 5/28/18

Caption

Provides relative to the Judicial Council of the Supreme Court of Louisiana

Impact

The passage of HB 493 is expected to enhance accountability and oversight in the setting of court costs and fees in Louisiana. By mandating review from the Judicial Council, the bill aims to promote greater scrutiny of financial decisions that could affect court operations and public access to justice. This change could potentially lead to more equitable cost structures for court services across the state, as it ensures that any increases are carefully considered and based on demonstrable needs.

Summary

House Bill 493 amends R.S. 13:62(B) regarding the procedures for imposing new court costs or fees in Louisiana. The bill requires that any proposal for a new or increased court cost or fee must first be submitted to the Judicial Council for review. This submission aims to ensure that such changes are justified and reasonably related to the operational needs of the courts. Additionally, it sets a timeline for when proposals must be submitted and establishes corresponding deadlines for the Judicial Council's recommendations to the legislature.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 493 appears to be supportive among legislators and legal professionals who advocate for increased transparency and judicial efficiency. Stakeholders recognize the importance of careful evaluation of court-related fees to avoid undue burden on citizens. While specific opposition isn't highlighted, the sentiment suggests a general agreement on the necessity of structured oversight rather than unregulated increases in court costs.

Contention

While there has been no significant contention noted in the discussions regarding HB 493, it can be inferred that some concerns may arise related to the balance between necessary funding for court operations and the potential for overreach in fee increases. The bill's requirement for a review process is likely intended to mitigate these concerns, but there may still be debates on the adequacy and parameters of such regulations in the future as they apply to funding court systems.