Can a Louisiana school board member vote to settle a class action lawsuit in which the member is a plaintiff?

Plain-English summary

East Feliciana Parish school board members belonged to a plaintiff class suing their own board. The district attorney's office asked whether they could participate in board decisions about the suit. In Opinion 03-0132, the Attorney General concluded that a member could not vote on or try to influence a contract matter arising from the litigation that could benefit that member. A proposed compromise or settlement was the opinion's example.

The AG did not say that the lawsuit itself was a contract. His conclusion turned on the possibility that the board would be asked to settle and that members of the plaintiff class had a personal interest in a favorable settlement. He cited the public contract fraud statute and earlier opinions about board members obtaining contracts with their own boards.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2003. 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.

What the opinion meant at issuance

School board members in the plaintiff class

The opinion treated voting on or influencing a settlement or other contract matter connected with their class action as a violation of La. R.S. 14:140. Its reasoning depended on the member's possible benefit from the board's expenditure.

Other board members and counsel

The opinion identified the conflict in the plaintiff-members' role. It did not decide every type of board discussion about the lawsuit; its express conclusion covered contract matters associated with it.

Common questions

Q: Could a board member who sued the school board vote on a settlement? A: No, according to the 2003 opinion. A plaintiff-member could benefit from a favorable settlement and could not vote on or try to influence that contract matter.

Q: Did the AG call the lawsuit itself a contract? A: No. The opinion said a lawsuit is not inherently a contract, but a proposed compromise or settlement may be one.

Q: Did the opinion forbid the member from participating in every discussion of the case? A: Its final conclusion addressed voting or influence on matters of contract associated with the class action. It did not separately decide all other litigation discussions.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion quoted LSA-R.S. 14:140's prohibition on a board member voting for or using influence to secure an expenditure of public funds to the member. It also quoted the statute's presumption when such an expenditure has been made. The AG discussed earlier insurance and gasoline contract opinions, copies of which were included with the 2003 letter, and applied their reasoning to a potential settlement.

Citations and references

Statute in the opinion: LSA-R.S. 14:140. Earlier AG opinions reproduced with the letter: La. Op. Atty. Gen., 1956-58 p. 666 and La. Op. Atty. Gen. 1946-48 p. 911.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/03-0132

Original opinion text

~tate o[
P.O. BOX 94095
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
BATON ROUGE, LA 70804-9095
RICHARD P. IEYOUB CRIMINAL DIVISION Telephone:
ATTORNEY GENERAL
(225) 342-7552
FAX:
(225) 342-7893

MAY I 6 ZO0 I
Opinion No. 03-0132

Michael L. Hughes
61 LAWS- General
Assistant District Attorney
LSA-R.S. 14:140 La. Op. Atty. Gen., 1956-58; La. Op. Atty. Gen. No.
P.O. Box 8428
1946-48
Clinton, LA 70722
It is a violation of LSA-R.S, 14:140 for members of the East Feliciana Parish School Board who are also members of a plaintiff class action in a
Dear Mr. Hughes: lawsuit versus the School Board to participate in School Board decisions
relating to the lawsuit.

Our office has received your correspondence of March 11, 2003 inquiring whether members of the East Feliciana Parish School Board who are also members of a plaintiff class action lawsuit versus the School Board are prohibited from participating in School Board decisions relating to the lawsuit.

LSA-R.S. 14:140 provides in pertinent part:

14:140 Public contract fraud

A. Public contract fraud is committed:

(1) When any public officer or public employee shall use his power or position as such officer or employee to secure any expenditure of public funds to himself, or to any partnership of which he is a member, or to any corporation of which he is a member, or to any corporation of which he is an officer, stockholder, or director; or

(2) When any member of any public board, body, or commission charged with the custody, control, or expenditure of any public funds votes for or uses his influence to secure any expenditure of such funds to himself, or to any partnership of which he is a member, or to any corporation of which he is an officer, director or stockholder.

The fact that an expenditure has been made to any party named in Paragraphs (1) and (2) of this Section, or to any partnership of which he is a member, or to any corporation of which he is an officer, stockholder, or director, shall be presumptive evidence that such person has used his power, position, or influence to secure such expenditure.

Page 2

Michael L. Hughes
OPI~ION 03-0132
Page 2

In La. Op. Atty. Gen., 1956-58 p. 666, a school board member who individually operated an insurance business could not vote for or use his "’~ "- to secure ~ .... uenc., expenditures of public funds for insurance for the school board. Similarly, in La. Op. Atty. Gen. 1946-48 p. 911, a board member could not vote for or use his influence to secure expenditures of board funds for the purchase of gasoline from himself.

It is important to note that in both of the foregoing opinions even though the individuals involved had not used their influence or voted for measures that would secure benefit to themselves, this office opined that it would be contrary to sound public policy for members of public bodies to be a party to any contract with boards of which they are members.

While a law suit is not per se a matter of contract, certain matters relating thereto may be such; particularly, in the instant case, the school board may be presented with an offer to compromise or settle the subject lawsuit. Clearly, the board members at issue would have a vested interest in a favorable settlement and should not, therefore, vote for or attempt to influence settlement or compromise which would be a contractual matter potentially inuring to their benefit.

For the foregoing reasons, it is the opinion of this office that school board members who are plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against the East Feliciana Parish School Board would violate La. R.S. 14:140 if they vote for or attempt to influence the voting of the board with respect to matters of contract associated with the class action lawsuit of which they are members.

Very truly yours,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB

BY:
A~RNEY GEN~L
Assistant Attorney General

PRK/ks/jy

Page 3

PUBLIC FUNDS AND PUBLIC CONTRACTS

Discussion of R.S. 14:139, dealing with influence of board member secure expenditure of public funds to himself.

July 18, 1956
Honorable Walter Chachere
State Representative
P. O. Box 327
Winnsboro, Louisiana
You state that you wish to know if a member of the school board, who individually operates an insurance busi- ness, can legally obtain insurance for his agency from the school board.
The statute in point is the Public Contract Fraud Stat- uts, R.S. 14:139, which reads as follows :
"Public contract fraud is committed:
, "(1) When any public, ~ officer or public employee shall use his power or position as such officer or em- ployee to secure any expenditure of public funds to himself, or to any partnership of which he is a mem- ber, or to any corporation of which he is an officer, stockholder or director; or
"(2) When any member of any public board, body, or commission charged with the custody, control or expenditure of any public funds votes for or uses his influence to secure any expenditure of such public funds" to himself, or to any partnership of which he is a member or to any corporation of which he is an officer, director, or stockholder.
"The fact that an expenditure has been made to any party named in this article, or to any partnership of which he is a member, or to any corporation of which he is an officer, stockholder or director, shall be presumptive evidence that such person has used his power, position or influence to secure such ex- penditure.

"Whoever commits the crime of public contract fraud shall be fined not more than one thousand dol- lars, or imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than two years, or both."
You will note that the statute applies only when a member votes for or used his influence to secure any ex- penditure of public funds to himself, and further states that when an expenditure has been so made, it shall be pre- sumptive evidence that such person has used his power, position or influence to secure such expenditure.
It is the opinion of this office that even though the member has not voted for or used his influence to secure such expenditure, and would thus not be amendable to the act above quoted, it would still be contrary to sound public policy for him to obtain insurance while he is a member of the school board.
-From T
G. DUPRE L~ ¯ ¯ ON

Page 4

Schools and School Districts
911

Members of public bodies should refrain from being parties ~o any contract with boards of. which they are members~ ~s .a matte," o,~ public policy.
October 17, 1947.
Honorable George W. Lester,
District Attorney,
4th Judicial District,
Monroe, Louisiana.
Your lett.er, of October 13, 1947, enclosing a. request from Honorable G. W. Welch, Superintendent of O.uachita Parish Schools, for the opinion .of this Department as to whether a Member of the School Board may legally sell gasoline to the Board, has been referred to me for attention.
Under the provisions of Article 140 .of the Criminal Code (Act 43 of 1942, as amended) and the decision of the Supreme Court in State v. Abernathy, 194 La. 559, .194 So. 19, a School Boar.d member would, notbe guilty of any crimi- nal violation unless he voted for or.. used, his influence to secure the expenditure of the .Board’s funds to himself.~ However, this Department has consistently expressed the opinion that members of public bodies should refrain from being parties to any contract with boards of which they are members, as a matter of public policy.
FRANCIS R. EDWARDS.