SUITS AGAINST STATE: Provides for the amount of interest awarded on claims for personal injury or wrongful death in suits against the state or political subdivisions. (8/1/26)
Summary
SB 139 amends Louisiana law governing suits against the state and political subdivisions by changing how legal interest is calculated on claims for personal injury or wrongful death. Under the bill, pre-judgment legal interest on these claims accrues at the lesser of 6% per year or the judicial interest rate, and it begins running from the date service is requested after judicial demand until the trial judge signs the judgment. The bill also clarifies the rate that applies after judgment is signed, distinguishing between legal interest and judicial interest for post-judgment accrual.
In practical terms, the measure updates R.S. 13:5112(C), which is part of Louisiana’s rules for claims against public entities, and affects plaintiffs, state agencies, local governments, and courts handling tort claims involving government defendants. It narrows and standardizes the interest calculation for these cases, potentially reducing or capping the amount of interest owed before judgment depending on the applicable judicial interest rate.
Impact
The bill directly amends R.S. 13:5112(C), the statute governing suits against the state or a political subdivision, by revising the interest formula for personal injury and wrongful death claims. It affects the amount of damages recoverable in government-liability cases by setting a cap tied to the lesser of 6% or the judicial interest rate and by specifying when interest begins and ends for pre-judgment and post-judgment periods. This change impacts claimants, public defendants, and courts applying Louisiana tort and sovereign-immunity-related procedures.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial in the legislature. It passed the Senate 38-0 and the House 87-0, indicating unanimous approval in both chambers. The final enactment as Act 13 suggests the measure was viewed as a technical or policy adjustment rather than a contentious overhaul.
Contention
No committee debate or recorded opposition is provided, and the unanimous floor votes suggest little visible contention. Any potential disagreement would likely center on the financial effect of limiting interest on claims against the state or local governments, with claimants potentially preferring higher or more predictable interest accrual and public entities favoring reduced exposure. However, the available record shows no organized opposition or split among lawmakers.