Louisiana House Bill HB266

Louisiana 2014 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/10/14
• Refer: 3/10/14

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Kartini Binte Hassan v. State of Louisiana, through the DOTD"

Impact

The passage of HB 266 has implications for state financial management, specifically concerning how the state allocates its budget to settle lawsuits and claims against it. By approving this appropriation, the state acknowledges the importance of settling legal disputes effectively, potentially reducing further legal costs and fostering a more favorable public perception. It also ensures that the state maintains a good relationship with its constituents by adhering to legal judgments, thus upholding the principles of accountability and transparency in government operations.

Summary

House Bill 266 is a legislative measure aimed at appropriating funds from the state general fund to settle a consent judgment in the case of 'Kartini Binte Hassan v. State of Louisiana, through the Department of Transportation and Development.' The specific amount of $25,000 is designated for this purpose, reflecting the state's commitment to fulfilling legal liabilities. The act aims to ensure that the state honors its obligations resulting from judicial proceedings, thus facilitating compliance with judicial orders and maintaining the rule of law in state operations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 266 appears to be largely procedural and pragmatic. Legislative discussions likely focused on the necessity of appropriating funds to comply with a court order rather than engendering significant political contention. Given the nature of the bill as a legal obligation, it is anticipated that members of the legislature would approach it with a sense of responsibility and urgency rather than partisan debate, making it a low-controversy item on the legislative agenda.

Contention

While there does not appear to be significant contention surrounding HB 266, one potential area of concern may arise regarding the broader implications of financial appropriations for settled claims. Some legislators may question the appropriateness of using state funds for such payments when considering the allocation of financial resources to urgent state needs. However, absent any substantial opposition or alternative proposals during discussions, the bill's passage seems straightforward.