Louisiana House Bill HB10

Louisiana 2021 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/9/21
• Refer: 2/9/21
• Refer: 4/12/21

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of consent judgment against the Department of Transportation and Development in the suit entitled "Virginia B. Guidry v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, et al"

Impact

The approval of HB 10 has a direct effect on state budgeting as it allocates funds from the State General Fund specifically for a legal obligation that the state must fulfill. This not only ensures compliance with the final judgment of the court but also indicates fiscal accountability within the state government. By resolving such legal matters through appropriations, the state demonstrates its commitment to uphold the rule of law and address financial matters that impact its agencies, such as the DOTD.

Summary

House Bill 10 is aimed at appropriating funds for the payment of a consent judgment pertaining to a legal case titled 'Virginia B. Guidry v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, et al'. The bill specifies an amount of $6,500 to be drawn from the State General Fund for the fiscal year 2020-2021. It essentially serves as a financial appropriation framework to settle a judgment against the Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD), indicating governmental responsibility for the resulting liabilities from this court case.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 10 appears to be largely neutral to positive, as it facilitates the resolution of a court ruling. Legislators who support the bill likely perceive it as a necessary step to ensure that the DOTD and the state adhere to judicial decisions, thereby reflecting a stance of accountability and responsibility. There may, however, be some concerns related to state spending and the prioritization of funds, although the bill's straightforward nature limits the scope of contentious discussion.

Contention

While the bill itself does not present significant points of contention given its straightforward appropriation of funds, it may be indicative of broader concerns surrounding state funding and management of legal liabilities. The requirement for such appropriations to settle judgments may raise questions about how frequently similar issues occur, potentially leading to discussions regarding effective risk management within state operations and the importance of preventing future litigation.