Louisiana House Bill HB393

Louisiana 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/3/16
• Refer: 3/3/16
• Refer: 3/14/16

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against DOTD in the matter of "Denise Ebanks v. The State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development, et al."

Impact

The approval of HB393 will ensure that the state meets legal obligations resulting from the court's judgment, highlighting the importance of timely and appropriate responses to judicial rulings. By allocating funds specifically for this purpose, the state is reinforcing its responsibility to uphold the judicial process and address claims against public entities, which can impact the budgeting and resource allocation in future fiscal sessions.

Summary

House Bill 393 addresses a specific legal matter by appropriating funds from the state general fund for the fiscal year 2016-2017. The bill designates the sum of $75,000 to settle a consent judgment in the case 'Denise Ebanks v. The State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development, et al.' This appropriation is essential for following through on a legal ruling, showing the state's commitment to fulfilling its judicial obligations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding the bill is largely procedural and utilitarian, reflecting the necessity of fulfilling legal judgments rather than engaging in contentious political debates. The legislative conversations seem to focus on the appropriateness of the funding amount and the promptness of the state's response to the court ruling, suggesting a consensus on the necessity of addressing the judgment while also adhering to budgetary constraints.

Contention

While no significant points of contention appear to be directly associated with HB393, discussions may center on the broader implications of such appropriations for state funding priorities and the potential strain on the general fund. Questions may arise regarding the adequacy of the allocated amount and whether it appropriately reflects the damages or claims awarded in the lawsuit, although these debates are typical for statutory appropriations of this nature.