Louisiana House Bill HB782

Louisiana 2015 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/20/15
• Refer: 4/21/15

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against DOTD in the matter of "Annette Tyler and Murphy Tyler, Sr. v. State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development"

Impact

The passage of HB 782 ensures that the state of Louisiana fulfills its legal and financial commitments, which is essential for maintaining public trust. By appropriating funds to settle the judgment, the bill not only resolves the specific case but also reinforces the framework for how the state manages liabilities arising from lawsuits. Such appropriations may set a precedent for future cases, highlighting the importance of budgeting for legal settlements within the state's financial planning.

Summary

House Bill 782 focuses on appropriating funds from the state general fund for the fiscal year 2015-2016. Specifically, it allocates $20,000 to satisfy a consent judgment in the case of 'Annette Tyler and Murphy Tyler, Sr. v. State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development.' This bill is important as it addresses the state's financial obligations resulting from legal proceedings against it, reflecting the necessity of governmental accountability in matters of judicial decisions.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 782 appears to be neutral at best, primarily focused on compliance with legal obligations rather than a reflection of broader economic or social policies. Since the bill addresses a specific financial judgment, there may be limited public and legislative discourse regarding its content, aside from recognition of the necessity to uphold the law.

Contention

While there may not be significant contention surrounding HB 782 given its straightforward nature, discussions around budget appropriations and the efficiency of state spending might surface. Critics may argue that any appropriations to settle judgments should be scrutinized to ensure accountability and transparency. Overall, the bill reflects the operational necessity of responding to judicial outcomes rather than engaging in contentious policy debates.