Louisiana House Bill HCR134

Louisiana 2012 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/8/12
• Engrossed: 5/8/12
• Refer: 5/9/12
• Report Pass: 5/22/12
• Passed: 5/24/12

Caption

Requests the La. State Law Institute to study procedures relative to the abandonment of civil actions

Impact

The adoption of HCR134 may lead to significant changes in how civil actions are managed within the state's legal framework. By directing a study on the issue, the resolution indicates a recognition that current processes may allow certain parties to exploit legal loopholes. Specifically, judgment creditors may face difficulties in serving sophisticated judgment debtors who purposely evade service, thereby avoiding legal repercussions and the dismissal of their cases. The proposed examination seeks to identify solutions to enhance fairness in these legal proceedings.

Summary

House Concurrent Resolution 134 (HCR134) requests the Louisiana State Law Institute to examine procedures related to the abandonment of civil actions and to deliver its findings and proposals for legislative action by January 1, 2014. This resolution stems from concerns surrounding the current policy that allows for the dismissal of civil actions if a plaintiff fails to act, which is designed to prevent harassment through protracted litigation without serious intent. The study aims to clarify and potentially reform the rules governing such dismissals.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HCR134 appears to be supportive among legislators, as indicated by the unanimous vote in favor of its adoption. The resolution reflects a collective acknowledgment of the complexities involved in civil litigation and the necessity for ensuring that the judicial process is fair for all parties involved. However, discussions may arise concerning the balance between protecting litigants from frivolous claims and ensuring that legitimate claims are not dismissed unjustly due to procedural shortcomings.

Contention

While HCR134 itself is a resolution urging a study rather than a bill that enacts immediate changes, the potential reforms could encounter contention. Stakeholders may disagree on the specifics of how abandonment procedures should be revised or what safeguards need to be placed to ensure that legitimate plaintiffs are not unduly disadvantaged. The underlying issues of service of process and the behavior of judgment debtors will likely remain focal points in any discussions or legislative proposals resulting from the study mandated by this resolution.