Provides for legislative continuances or extensions. (8/1/24)
Impact
If enacted, SB185 is set to enhance judicial efficiency by minimizing scheduling conflicts between legislatorial obligations and court appearances. By removing financial costs associated with filing motions for legislative continuances, the bill aims to encourage legislators to prioritize their legislative roles without penalizing them for their public service duties. This could lead to smoother proceedings in the court system, particularly when legislative sessions overlap with ongoing legal matters.
Summary
Senate Bill 185 addresses procedural aspects of legislative continuances and extensions in Louisiana. The bill proposes amendments to existing civil procedure laws, enabling legislators and their employees to request continuances or extensions without incurring fees. These motions can be filed when legislative duties conflict with legal deadlines, allowing for better management of court schedules and legislative duties. Specifically, SB185 outlines the process and timelines for filing such motions, ensuring that requests are made promptly and without financial penalties for the requesting party.
Sentiment
The sentiment around SB185 appears supportive, particularly among legislative members who may face challenges in balancing their responsibilities between court proceedings and their duties. The absence of opposition during voting might indicate a consensus on the necessity of the bill. However, discussions may still emerge about the potential implications of these changes on the judiciary and the administrative resources required to implement new procedures effectively.
Contention
While the bill enjoys support, some points of contention may arise regarding how the provisions for continuances might be interpreted in practice, especially concerning the timing and the validity of the reasons for such requests. Additionally, potential adjustments to legal standards surrounding continuances could provoke discussions on fairness and access to justice, particularly in complex cases that might involve non-legislative parties.
Provides relative to court costs in suits involving the state and state agencies in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court. (2/3 - CA7s2.1(A)) (8/1/23)
Provides that retaliation against an employee for an absence from work due to genetic testing or a medically necessary cancer screening shall be an unlawful employment practice. (8/1/23)