Did Louisiana's wildlife department have to pay court costs to execute its administrative judgments?

Plain-English summary

Louisiana's Department of Wildlife and Fisheries asked whether it had to pay costs charged by clerks and sheriffs when obtaining writs and executing civil administrative judgments in its favor. The Attorney General read R.S. 13:4521's court cost exemption for the state as covering that execution work. He therefore concluded that the department did not have to pay those costs for judgments arising from wildlife violations.

The opinion treated issuance of writs and execution of these judgments as an open judicial proceeding. That classification mattered because the exemption applied to judicial proceedings, not every administrative activity of a state department.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2001. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Did the AG exempt the department from execution costs?
Yes. He said it need not pay the clerk and sheriff costs for executing judgments in its favor from wildlife violations.

Why did the statutory court cost exemption apply?
The AG characterized the writ and judgment execution work as an open judicial proceeding covered by R.S. 13:4521.

Did the opinion exempt all agency expenses?
No. It addressed court costs for the described judgment-execution proceedings.

Background and statutory framework

R.S. 13:4521 exempted the state and specified other governmental entities from court costs in judicial proceedings. The AG applied that text and earlier opinions on service and enforcement costs to the department's request.

Citations and references

• R.S. 13:4521

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/01-0039

Original opinion text

March 2, 2001
OPINION 01-39

Mr. James H. Jenkins, Jr.
Secretary, Dept. of Wildlife
& Fisheries
P.O. Box 98000
Baton Rouge, LA 70809-9000

Dear Mr. Jenkins:

This office is in receipt of your request for an opinion of the Attorney General in regard to court costs charged by clerks of court and sheriff's offices against the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. You indicate the Department is required to execute upon and collect amounts owed as a result of civil administrative judgments issued in the Department's favor arising from wildlife violations, and you are concerned about costs charged in connection with issuance of writs and execution of these judgments. You state it is your belief that a department of state government is exempt from payment of these fees, and ask for the opinion of this office in this matter.

R.S. 13:4521 provides in pertinent part that "neither the state, nor any parish, municipality, nor other political subdivision, public board, or commission, nor any officer or employee of any such governmental entity when acting within the scope and authority of such employment or when discharging his official duties shall be required to pay court costs in any judicial proceeding instituted or prosecuted by or against the state, or any such parish, municipality, or other political subdivision, board or commission, in any court of this state or any municipality of this state". This office has concluded in accordance with this statute that neither the state nor political subdivisions shall be required to pay court costs prior to an adverse judgment in "any" judicial proceeding instituted by or against the state or a political subdivision, Atty. Gen. Op. 94-280. However, this office recognized that the exemption provided in R.S. 13:4521 applies only to open "judicial proceedings".

We would conclude that the court costs charged by clerks of court and sheriff's offices to issue writs and execute upon judgments obtained by the Department as a result of civil administrative judgments issued in favor of the Department would be an open judicial proceeding, and the statute establishes an exemption relative to "any" judicial proceeding. Inasmuch as this office stated in Atty. Gen. Op. 88-86 that the municipality who files a suit

Page 2

Mr. James H. Jenkins. Jr.
OPINION 01-39
Page 2

cannot be held to pay the court costs associated with the service of civil papers by a sheriff, it would follow such costs would not be applicable for execution of the judgment. Moreover, this office has noted in Atty. Gen. Op. 98-36 that while R.S. 13:4521 does not specifically mention housing authorities as exempt from costs, they are included within the definition of "governmental unit", as would be the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries.

Accordingly, the payment of costs by the Department would not be required for execution of judgments issued in favor of the Department arising from wildlife violations.

We hope this sufficiently answers your inquiry, but if we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely yours,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB
Attorney General

By:________
BARBARA B. RUTLEDGE
Assistant Attorney General

RPI/bbr

Page 3

Mr. James H. Jenkins. Jr.
OPINION 01-39
Page 3

OPINION 01-39

46-A Fees & Costs
R.S. 13:4521

The Department of Wildlife &
Fisheries is not required to
pay costs for executions of
judgments issued in favor of
the Department arising from
wildlife violations.

Mr. James H. Jenkins, Jr.
Secretary, Dept. of Wildlife
& Fisheries
P.O. Box 98000
Baton Rouge, LA 70809-9000

Date Received: Jan. 29, 2001
Date Released: March 2, 2001

BARBARA B. RUTLEDGE
Assistant Attorney General