Louisiana House Bill HB741

Louisiana 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/4/16
• Refer: 3/4/16
• Refer: 3/14/16

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Rebecca N. Cole, et al. v. State of La. through DOTD"

Impact

The passage of HB 741 has a direct financial implication for the state’s budget, as it requires the appropriation of a sizable sum from the general fund. This may affect the availability of funds for other state projects or obligations. By fulfilling the court’s orders in this judgment, the state upholds its legal obligations and mitigates the potential for further financial liabilities that could arise from prolonged litigation or non-compliance with court decisions.

Summary

House Bill 741 appropriates funds from the state general fund of Louisiana for the fiscal year 2016-2017 to pay a consent judgment in the case of 'Rebecca N. Cole, et al. v. State of Louisiana through DOTD'. The bill specifically allocates $375,000 to the plaintiffs, Rebecca N. Cole, Kevin M. Cole, and Cheryl R. Cole, and an additional $25,000 to the intervenor, The Travelers Insurance Company. This bill is a straightforward funding measure that supports the resolution of a legal case against the state and ensures the plaintiffs receive their awarded damages.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 741 appears to be neutral to positive, as it represents the state taking responsibility for financial judgments resulting from legal actions. There is generally less contention in legislative circles over bills like this that serve to resolve court mandates, as they are often seen as necessary steps to ensure compliance and good governance. However, some discussions may revolve around the efficiency of state funds and the ramifications of such appropriations.

Contention

Though HB 741 itself does not appear to have strong points of contention, it indirectly highlights broader concerns about the state’s legal exposure and the management of public funds. Issues may arise related to how often such necessary appropriations are made and whether the state is doing enough to prevent scenarios that lead to such judgments in the first place. Stakeholders might also debate the implications of relying on appropriations to settle legal issues rather than addressing systemic problems that lead to litigation.