Louisiana House Bill HB929

Louisiana 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/29/16
• Refer: 3/30/16

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment in the matter of "Angela Harris, et al. v. State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development"

Impact

The enactment of HB 929 will facilitate the payment of the specified amount from the state's financial resources, ensuring compliance with the court's ruling in the related lawsuit. This appropriation reflects the legal and fiscal responsibilities of the state government. By appropriating funds for this purpose, the bill ensures that the state does not default on its judicial obligations, which is critical in maintaining the integrity of state governance and upholding the rule of law. The funding for this payment will derive from the Louisiana General Fund for the fiscal year 2016-2017.

Summary

House Bill 929 proposes an appropriation from the state general fund to allocate $50,000 for the payment of a consent judgment stemming from the lawsuit titled 'Angela Harris, et al. v. State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development.' This bill is primarily concerned with fulfilling a legal obligation of the state to compensate the plaintiff in accordance with the judgment ruled by the court. The bill emphasizes the state's commitment to addressing financial liabilities arising from legal actions involving state agencies.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding HB 929 appears neutral, as the bill pertains to a mandatory payment dictated by a legal judgment rather than a policy initiative that provokes significant public discourse. The legislature is largely expected to support such measures that fulfill existing legal commitments. There are no major indications of contention around this bill, as it aligns with the state’s obligation to comply with judicial decisions and avoid further litigation or financial repercussions.

Contention

Because this bill deals with a specific legal case rather than broad legislative policy, there are limited points of contention noted within the discussions surrounding HB 929. The primary concern is ensuring that the funds are available and appropriated in a timely manner to fulfill the state's legal obligations. Additionally, there may be discussions regarding the overall financial health of the General Fund and how such payments might impact future appropriations for other state needs. No notable opposition is documented, demonstrating a consensus view on the necessity of complying with the court ruling.