Could a New Orleans criminal court commissioner serve as a contracted boxing judge?

Plain-English summary

A New Orleans criminal court commissioner asked whether he could also be licensed as a boxing or wrestling "judge" by the Louisiana Boxing and Wrestling Commission. The Attorney General said the proposed part-time judging arrangement did not violate the Dual Officeholding Law because the commission would retain him by contract. It described licensed boxing judges as neither employees nor members of the commission's board.

The opinion relied on two earlier AG opinions attached to the PDF. Both distinguished a contractual services relationship from "employment" under the dual-officeholding statute. Its conclusion depended on that characterization of the arrangement, not merely on the title "judge."

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.

Common questions

Did licensing by the boxing commission make the court commissioner a state employee?
The AG said no under the facts supplied: licensed judges were retained under contract and were neither commission employees nor board members.

Could he hold both roles without violating dual-officeholding law?
The opinion said yes for the described contractual boxing-judge work alongside his court commissionership.

Why did the contract matter?
The statute's employment definition concerned a salaried or per-diem government job. The opinion treated this judging arrangement as a contract instead.

Background and statutory framework

The Louisiana Boxing and Wrestling Commission was a state agency. The AG distinguished its contracted judges from employees under LSA-R.S. 42:62(3) and cited earlier AG Opinions 88-618 and 88-653, which are reproduced as enclosures in the official PDF. The available extract's date line is damaged, so this record leaves the exact issue date blank.

Citations and references

• LSA-R.S. 42:62(3)
• AG Opinions 88-618 and 88-653, reproduced in the official PDF

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/02-0215

Original opinion text

One American Place
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
301 Main Street, Suite 1020
P.O. Box 94005
CIVIL DIVISION
TEL.: (225) 219-7711
BATON ROUGE
FAX: (225) 219-7712
RICHARD P. IEYOUB
70B04-9005
AI-rORN EY GFNERAL

AUG ;~ ] 2002
OPINION 02-0215

The Honorable Joe Giarusso, Jr.
78. Officers - Dual Officeholding
Being a commissioner at the Criminal District Court and Criminal District Court being a "judge" licensed by the Louisiana Boxing and
2700 Tulane Avenue
Wrestling Commission is not a violation of the dual
New Orleans, LA 70119
officeholding law

Dear Judge Giarusso:

In your letter dated May 29, 2002, you requested an opinion of this office concerning the question of dual officeholding. Specifically, you asked whether being a commissioner at Criminal District Court in New Orleans and being licensed as a "judge" by the Louisiana Boxing and Wrestling Commission would violate the Dual Officeholding Law.

The Louisiana Boxing and Wrestling Commission is a state agency within the Office of the Governor. LSA-R.S. 4:61. The judges licensed and utilized by the "Commission" are neither employees nor board members. The position of boxing judge is a part-time job. The Commission would retain you under a contractual agreement.

Consistent with earlier opinions of this office, (Opinion 88-653 and Opinion 88-618) the relationship between you and the Commission is one of contract rather than "employment" as defined in LSA-R.S. 42:62(3), therefore, the provisions of the Dual Officeholding Statute are not violated.

It is the opinion of this office that being a commissioner and being licensed as a "judge" by the Louisiana Boxing and Wrestling Commission would not violate the Dual Officeholding Law.

Yours very truly,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB
AFFORNEY GENERAL

ANN EVANS WALL
Assistant Attorney General

RPI/AEW;dsc

Enclosures

Page 2

WILLIAM
Telephone:
504-342-7013

OPINION NUMBER 88-618
78 Officers - Dual Officeholdlng
R.S. 42:61; R.S. 12:202 C; R.S. 42:65
Contract b~tween CTC, s non-profit, quasz publ~c corporatzon for managerial
Honorable Michael L. McCleary servlces, does not vlolate Dual Offzceholding
State Representative
statute.
Post Office Box 708
Baker, Louisiana 70704
Dear Representative McCleary:
In accordance with R.S. 42:65 C you have requested an opinion of the Attorney General regarding the legality of a contract between McCleary and Associates, Inc. and Capitol Transportation Corporation (CTC), a non-profit corporation created by the City of Baton Rouge and the Parish of East Baton Rouge in 1970 pursuant to R.S. 12:202 C. The purpose of CTC is to operate a public transportation system. The contract would require McCleary and Associates, Inc. to perform managerial services for CTC.
Under the circumstances presented, CTC is contracting with a private corporation for managerial services. The corporation is a separate person and a legal entity and CTC is not engaging you as its employee on a salary or per diem basis; therefore, there is no "employment" of you by CTC as defined in R.S. 42:62 (3). That definition is as follows:
"Employment" means any job compensated on a salary or per diem basis, other than an elective or appointive office, in which a person is an employee of the state government or of a political subdivision thereof.
Accordingly, it is the opinion of this office that the engagement of McCleary and Associates, Inc. by CTC, a non-profit, quasi-public corporation, for management services does not violate Louisiana’s Dual Officeholding Law.

Page 3

Honorable Michael L. McCleary
OPINION NUMBER 88-618
Page Two

Trusting that the foregoing sufficiently answers your inquiry, I remain
Sincerely,
WILLIAM J. JR.
Attorney ~ral

BY :
KENNETH C D
Chief
KCD:mac

Page 4

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

WILUAM J.
Telephone:
504-342-7013
~E~!iBER 2 9 1988
OPINION NUMBER 88-653
78 DUAL OFFICEHOLDING
R.S. 42:63
Member of the Legislature who enters a contract, wlth a subszdlary agency of a
Honorable Irma M. Dixon
local governing body, to perform consultlng
State Representative
and managerlal servlces does not v~ola~e
Dual Officeholdlng Law.
Post Office Box 4070
New Orleans, Louisiana 70178-4070

Dear Ms. Dixon:
In your letter dated December 6, 1988, you have requested an opinion of this office. You state that the Audubon Park Commission has entered into a contract with the Audubon Institute, a private non-profit corporation, which operates the New Orleans Zoological Gardens and the Aquarium of the Americas.
The Institute would like to retain you under a contractual agreement, as Director of Operations for the Aquarium. The Commission formed the Institute for the purposes of operating and maintaining the Aquarium.
We are enclosing a copy of an opinion of this office, 88-618, to the Honorable Michael McCleary, State Representative, which deals with an almost identical set of facts.
Consistent with our earlier opinion it is the opinion of this office that if the relationship between you and the Institute is one of contract rather than "employment" as defined in R.S. 42:62(3), the provisions of the Dual Officeholding Statute are not violated.
Thus, it is the opinion of this office that you may legally enter into a contract individually with the Audubon Institute to perform contractual consulting services for the Aquarium of the Americas because such a contractual relationship will not result in an "employment" as defined by the Louisiana Dual Officeholding Law.

Page 5

Honorable Irma M. Dixon
02INION NUMBER 88-653
Page Two

Trusting that the foregoing sufficiently answers your inquiry, I remain
Sincerely,
IAM J. G~TE, JR.
AttoWILLrney, G~ral--

KENNETH C. D~J~AN
Chief CouPs e i
KCD:mac
Enclosure