Louisiana House Bill HB605

Louisiana 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/3/11
• Refer: 5/4/11

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against the state in the matter of "William Mothershead v. Matthew Davis, et al"

Impact

The approval of HB 605 signifies a commitment by the state legislature to honor legal judgments and ensure that settlements are paid timely. Such appropriations can have implications for future state budgets and financial planning, especially in the context of fulfilling prior financial commitments. By allocating these funds, the Louisiana government demonstrates its dedication to upholding the rule of law and resolving disputes appropriately, albeit on a small monetary scale compared to larger state budget categories.

Summary

House Bill 605 concerns the appropriation of $2,500 from the Louisiana state general fund for the fiscal year 2011-2012. The funds are designated for the payment of a consent judgment related to the case 'William Mothershead v. Matthew Davis, et al.' This case involves a legal settlement against the state, and the bill's primary purpose is to ensure that the state meets its financial obligations resulting from this judgment.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 605 appears to be neutral, as it is a straightforward appropriation with a specific purpose. There is little controversy associated with the bill itself since it primarily deals with the allocation of funds to meet an existing financial obligation. As such, the discussion surrounding this bill likely centers on procedural considerations rather than ideological debates.

Contention

While there are no significant points of contention reported in the discussions of HB 605, such financial appropriations may still evoke concern regarding the state's overall fiscal health and the management of the general fund. Lawmakers may discuss the importance of accountability in how appropriations are made and the necessity of performing due diligence when settling legal cases to prevent future financial burdens. The lack of controversy may also suggest that this bill is somewhat routine in the grand scale of legislative activities.