Louisiana House Bill HB173

Louisiana 2012 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/12/12
• Refer: 3/12/12

Caption

Appropriate funds for payment of judgment against the state in the matter of Allstate Insurance Company as partial subrogee to the rights of/and Vernita Hutton v. DOTD"

Impact

The passage of HB 173 signifies a direct financial obligation of the state to settle a judgment awarded by the Civil District Court in Orleans Parish. By fulfilling this payment, the state ensures compliance with judicial orders, which may prevent additional legal repercussions and potential costs arising from delayed payments. This appropriates a relatively small but necessary amount from the general fund, indicating the ongoing need for fiscal responsibility in handling court judgments against state entities.

Summary

House Bill 173 is a legislative measure aimed at appropriating funds from the state general fund to cover a court judgment involving the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD). Specifically, the bill allocates a total of $1,111.75 for payment of a consent judgment in the case of Allstate Insurance Company as partial subrogee to the rights of Vernita Hutton. This funding is designated for the fiscal year 2012-2013, reflecting the state’s financial obligations stemming from the judicial proceedings associated with this case.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 173 appears to be generally neutral as it addresses a necessary financial obligation rather than engaging in a substantial policy debate. The appropriative nature of the bill is straightforward, with little contention expected since it concerns compliance with a court ruling. Legislators might view the measure as a form of necessary due diligence to uphold the rule of law and maintain public trust in governmental financial practices.

Contention

Given the specific focus of HB 173 on the financial appropriation for a court judgment, significant points of contention or debate are likely minimal. However, discussions may arise regarding the efficiency of state financial management and the implications of recurring court cases requiring appropriations from the state fund. The context surrounding this case may also lead to greater scrutiny on how the DOTD handles legal matters and whether alternative measures could mitigate similar liabilities in the future.