Louisiana House Bill HB95

Louisiana 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/18/22
• Refer: 2/18/22
• Refer: 3/14/22

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of the consent judgment against the state in the suit entitled Adrienne Lezina v. the State of Louisiana, et al.

Impact

The approval of HB95 will authorize a direct payment of $225,000 to settle legal claims against the state, which will have implications for future state funding priorities and budget allocations. By designating specific funds for legal settlements, taxpayer money is being utilized in response to judicial accountability rather than being directed solely toward typical budgetary items like infrastructure or public services. This could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled financially by the state in the future.

Summary

House Bill 95 (HB95) is a legislative proposal aimed at appropriating funds from the State General Fund for the fiscal year 2021-2022 to pay a consent judgment in the case of Adrienne Lezina versus the State of Louisiana. This judgment, related to the Department of Transportation and Development, includes compensation for damages as negotiated in the court settlement. The bill is focused on ensuring the appropriated funds are disbursed correctly and specifies conditions under which the payment is to be made, ensuring that only finalized judgments will be funded.

Sentiment

General sentiment surrounding HB95 appears neutral to positive, as the bill seeks to resolve a legal matter without extending litigation. However, some concerns may arise regarding the adequacy of state funds for both current obligations and unexpected settlements like this one. Legislators may find themselves balancing the immediate needs of legal settlements against other budgetary pressures, which could lead to debates about fiscal responsibility and the management of state resources.

Contention

A notable point of contention may be the specific provisions of the bill that dictate how and when the payment will occur. It stipulates that interest on the judgment will cease to accrue as of the bill's effective date, which could be viewed as an effort to limit financial liability to the state. This might lead to discussions about fairness in financial settlements and whether such measures could affect the willingness of individuals to pursue justice through legal channels against the state.