Appropriates funds for payment of the judgment rendered by the Board of Tax Appeals in the claim against the state entitled Bruce Jordan and Sandra Jordan v. State of Louisiana, through Its Attorney General, Jeff Landry
Impact
The approval of HB 449 allows for an expedited resolution to the legal dispute between the Jordans and the state, which may have implications for the future handling of similar judgments against the state. By providing a clear appropriation from the State General Fund, it sets a precedent for how such financial obligations should be approached legislatively. This act also prevents the accrual of interest from the effective date, meaning that the state could save money by settling the judgment promptly rather than allowing interest to accumulate over time, which can occur in unresolved legal disputes.
Summary
House Bill 449, introduced by Representative Miguez, appropriates $28,215 from the State General Fund for the fiscal year 2021-2022 to pay a judgment rendered by the Board of Tax Appeals in a case involving Bruce Jordan and Sandra Jordan against the State of Louisiana. This act specifies the financial appropriation necessary to settle the claims arising from this court judgment. Furthermore, the bill establishes guidelines regarding how the payment should be executed, ensuring that documentation is presented to the state treasurer before any funds are disbursed.
Sentiment
The general sentiment surrounding HB 449 appears to be pragmatic, focusing on the necessity of resolving legal disputes efficiently and in compliance with financial obligations. While specific opposition or support was not outlined in the documents reviewed, the straightforward nature of the bill likely leads to broad bipartisan support, viewing the act primarily as a necessary financial transaction rather than a controversial piece of legislation.
Contention
While there doesn't seem to be significant contention surrounding HB 449, potential points of concern could arise if similar future cases lead to larger financial appropriations. The clause allowing the judgment to prevail over the proposed law in case of any conflict illustrates an acknowledgment of the authority of the judiciary, which could set the stage for discussions on the balance between legislative action and judicial rulings, particularly regarding state funds.
Appropriates funds for payment of the stipulated judgment of the Board of Tax Appeals against the state in the suit captioned EDF, Inc. versus Kevin Richard, Secretary of Department of Revenue, State of Louisiana and State of Louisiana
Appropriates funds for payment of the amended non-appealable judgment by consent against the state in the suit entitled Mitchell Johnson, Jr. v. State of Louisiana et al. c/w David Lanus et al. v. State of Louisiana et al.