Louisiana House Bill HB23

Louisiana 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/25/11
• Refer: 4/25/11

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Vanna Darlene McManus, et al v. State of Louisiana, DOTD, et al"

Impact

If enacted, this bill would have immediate financial implications for the state budget, as it mandates a significant payout from the general fund. The appropriated amount covers not only the principal judgment but also additional costs that may burden state finances. This bill may exemplify how the state handles legal liabilities incurred through agency actions, signaling to the legislature the need for careful management of such funds to avoid further appropriations in the future. The financial accountability is essential for ensuring that the state manages its resources effectively.

Summary

House Bill 23 is an act proposed by Representative Fannin that aims to appropriate funds from the state general fund to pay a judgment from a legal case entitled 'Vanna Darlene McManus v. State of Louisiana, DOTD, et al'. The total amount appropriated is $2,910,724.47, which includes legal interest and court costs associated with this judgment. The bill also specifies that the judgment will be deemed paid as of the effective date of the act, which is set for July 1, 2011. This legal case has likely generated specific attention due to its implications for state funding and budgetary allocations.

Sentiment

Overall sentiment around HB 23 appears pragmatic, focusing on fulfilling legal obligations rather than sparking contentious debate. Appropriating funds to cover court judgments is often seen as a necessary function of government, although concerns may arise regarding budgetary impacts. The sentiment largely revolves around ensuring compliance with judicial decisions while navigating the financial implications for state resources. Stakeholders, including lawmakers and state officials, likely appreciate the importance of adhering to court rulings, though there may be underlying concerns about the fiscal health of the state general fund.

Contention

While there are no major points of contention explicitly articulated in the brief provided, the necessity of such appropriations often leads to discussions about fiscal responsibility and the potential prioritization of funding in the face of other pressing state needs. The bill's likely impact on future funding allocations or budget discussions may prompt dialogue amongst legislators about how to effectively manage state resources and address the implications of legal judgments in the legislative process.