Could a Lawrason Act police chief let officers do paid off-duty security work in town police cars, and could the mayor dismiss traffic tickets by initialing them?

Plain-English summary

This opinion was issued in 2002, in response to a Lawrason Act police chief's questions about the Town of Gramercy. At the time, the Gramercy Police Department had contracted to work off-duty security detail at a local truck stop casino, and the chief asked two things: whether officers could use town-owned police cars for that off-duty paid work, and whether the mayor could dismiss a traffic ticket in his own office simply by signing his initials to it.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2002. 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.

On the first question, the AG's office observed that a law enforcement agency could allow its officers to take private security work during off-duty hours, including use of police-issued equipment such as town vehicles. The opinion flagged a liability caveat: because the officers remained clothed with the apparent power and authority of the agency while doing this off-duty work, the agency could face liability for their actions during the detail. The opinion cited three of the office's own prior opinions (01-68, 99-273, 97-80) as consistent authority on that point, without repeating their specific facts here.

On the second question, the AG looked to La. R.S. 32:398.2, which at the time set out a specific, structured process for disposing of traffic citations. The statute required every citation to be deposited with a court of proper jurisdiction or an appropriate traffic violations bureau, and required that disposition happen only through trial, other official court action (including bail forfeiture), or payment/bail deposit through the bureau. The statute separately made it unlawful for any traffic enforcement officer or public employee to dispose of a citation, or a record of one, in any other manner, and required administrative officers to track and account for every citation issued. The opinion (as reproduced in the extracted text available) sets out this statutory framework as the governing answer to the mayor's-initials question, though the specific concluding sentence applying it directly to the initials scenario is not present in the extracted portion of this opinion's text.

Common questions

Q: Did this office think the off-duty security arrangement was risk-free for the town?
A: No. The opinion specifically flagged potential agency liability because officers doing off-duty security work remain clothed with the apparent authority of the police department, citing three prior opinions on the same point.

Q: What was the statutory process this opinion pointed to for handling a traffic citation?
A: La. R.S. 32:398.2 required the original citation or a copy to be deposited with a court of proper jurisdiction or a traffic violations bureau, and required disposition only by trial, other official court action, bail forfeiture, or payment/bail deposit through the bureau, not through any informal or ad hoc method.

Background and statutory framework (as it stood in 2002)

The Lawrason Act context. The Town of Gramercy was governed by La. R.S. 33:321 et seq., the Lawrason Act, Louisiana's default municipal governance statute for towns without a home rule charter.

Off-duty police work and municipal liability. The opinion's analysis on off-duty security work drew on this office's prior opinions Nos. 01-68, 99-273, and 97-80, addressing when a law enforcement agency may permit officers to take private security details and the liability implications of doing so with agency equipment.

Traffic citation disposition. La. R.S. 32:398.2, as in effect in 2002, set out mandatory procedures for depositing and disposing of traffic citations, distinguishing citations for ordinary violations from citations under La. R.S. 32:80(A), which had to be disposed of only by trial or a plea accepted in open court, not through the traffic violations bureau.

Richard P. Ieyoub was the Attorney General of Louisiana at the time this opinion issued.

Citations and references

Statutes (as they stood in 2002):
- La. R.S. 33:321 et seq. (Lawrason Act, municipal governance)
- La. R.S. 33:423 (cited in the opinion's subject-matter heading)
- La. R.S. 32:398.2 (traffic citation disposition procedure)
- La. R.S. 32:80(A) (citations requiring trial or in-court plea, not bureau disposition)

Prior AG opinions referenced:
- La. Atty. Gen. Op. Nos. 01-68, 99-273, and 97-80 (off-duty police work and agency liability)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/02-0026

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain, the linked PDF is authoritative. The extracted text available for this older opinion ends partway through the statutory quotation of R.S. 32:398.2 and does not include the office's final concluding paragraph or signature block; see the linked PDF for the complete opinion.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
P.O. Box 94005
RICHARD P. IEYOUB
TEL: (504) 342-7013
ATTORNEY GENERAL
70804-9005
FAX: (504) 342-7335

February 15, 2002

OPINION 02-0026

77 OFFICERS
R.S. 33:321, et seq., R.S. 33:423, R.S. 32:398.2

Mr. Kenny P. Poche
Chief of Police
111 Main Street
Gramercy, LA 70052

Dear Chief Poche:

You have asked this office to respond to the following questions concerning the Town of Gramercy, a Lawrason Act municipality, governed by the provisions of R.S. 33:321, et seq.

1. Is it legal for the Chief of Police to authorize his police officers to use town police cars to work a security detail at a local truck stop casino within the city limits on their off duty time?

You advise us that the Gramercy Police Department has been contracted to work security detail for the Golden Grove Truck Stop Casino in Gramercy from the hours of six p.m. to six a.m., seven days a week.

This office has observed that a law enforcement agency may allow its police officers to contract for private security work during those officers' off-duty hours. The officers may be allowed to use their police issued equipment, including town vehicles. Note that the agency may face liability for the officers' actions as the officers are clothed with the apparent power and authority of that agency. See Attorney General Opinions 01-68, 99-273, and 97-80.

2. Does the mayor have the authority to nolle prosequi traffic tickets in his office by just signing his initials to the ticket?

The correct method of disposition of traffic tickets is provided for in R.S. 32:398.2 which states:

§ 398.2. Disposition of traffic citations; unlawful acts; records

A. Each traffic enforcement officer upon issuing a traffic citation to an alleged violator of any provision of the motor vehicle laws of this state or of any traffic ordinance of any city or town shall deposit the original citation or a copy of such traffic citation with a court having jurisdiction over the alleged offense or with the appropriate traffic violations bureau. However, a citation for a violation of R.S. 32:80(A) shall be deposited only with a court and not with a traffic violations bureau.

B. Upon the deposit of the original citation or a copy of the traffic citation with a court having jurisdiction over the alleged offense or with the traffic violations bureau as set forth herein, the original citation or copy of such traffic citation shall be disposed of only by trial in the court of proper jurisdiction or any other official action by a judge of the court, including forfeiture of the bail, or by the deposit of sufficient bail with the traffic violations bureau or payment of a fine to said bureau by the person to whom such traffic citation has been issued. However, a citation or its copy alleging a violation of R.S. 32:80(A) shall be disposed of only by trial or acceptance of a plea in open court.

C. It shall be unlawful for any traffic enforcement officer or any other officer or public employee to dispose of a traffic citation or copies thereof or of the record of the issuance of the citation in a manner other than as required herein.

D. The chief administrative officer of each traffic enforcement agency in the state shall require all traffic officers under his supervision to return to him a copy of every traffic citation which was issued by the officer for the violation of a traffic law or ordinance, and in addition shall require the return of all copies of every traffic citation which has been spoiled or upon which an entry has been made without having issued the citation to the alleged violator.

E. The chief administrative officer shall also maintain or cause to be maintained in connection with every traffic citation issued by an officer under his supervision a record of the disposition of the charge by the court or its traffic violations bureau in which the original or a copy of the traffic citation was deposited.