RS 42:1441.4

386 words·~2 min read·/la/title-42/42-149

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

RS 42:1441.4

§1441.4. Legislative findings and purposes

With respect to the nonliability situations set forth in this Chapter as well as the master-servant tort liability provisions contained in this Chapter, the legislature finds and states that:

(1)The intent of the Civil Code Article 2320 and other laws imposing liability on a master for the offenses and quasi offenses of his servant can be found implied in the traditional interpretation and application thereof, in much the same manner as explained in Blanchard v. Ogima, 253 La. 34, 215 So.2d 902 (1968), the same with respect to the relationships between governmental bodies politic and their respective officers and employees as it is with respect to relationships among private individuals.

(2)Such cases as Foster v. Hampton, 352 So.2d 197 (La. 1977) and 381 So.2d 789 (La. 1980); Mullins v. State, 387 So.2d 1151 (La. 1980), and Hryhorchuk v. Smith, 390 So.2d 497 (La. 1980), represent misinterpretations and misapplications of Civil Code Article 2320 and other laws imposing liability on a master for the offenses and quasi offenses of his servant.

(3)The intent and purpose of the provisions contained in this Chapter relative thereto are to restore to the legislatively created Civil Code Article 2320 and other laws imposing such master-servant liability the true legislatively intended meaning, interpretation, and application deviated from in such relationships, circumstances, and cases as reported in Foster v. Hampton, Mullins v. State, and Hryhorchuk v. Smith, supra.

(4)The intent, purpose, and effect of such provisions in this Chapter are not to attempt a reestablishment of any governmental immunity based on the status of sovereignty of any government, but rather to correct the legislatively created substantive law, in much the same manner as such provisions were correctly interpreted and upheld in Martinez v. Reynolds, 398 So.2d 156 (La. App. 3rd Cir. 1981), and Sullivan v. Quick, 406 So.2d 284 (La. App. 3rd Cir. 1981).

(5)The liability of government should be no greater than that of private individuals.

(6)That those legislatively created substantive laws which are misinterpreted and misapplied to result in such greater governmental liability can and should be corrected to the same extent and for the same relationships wherein they were erroneously interpreted and applied.

Acts 1985, No. 451, §1; Acts 1995, No. 828, §4, eff. Nov. 23, 1995.