Could Harahan's police and fire civil service board award a successful employee appeal attorney fees?

Plain-English summary

Harahan's Municipal Police and Fire Civil Service Board asked whether it could award attorney fees to an employee who won a discipline appeal after the board found the employer had not acted in good faith for cause. In Opinion 03-0446, the Louisiana AG answered no. The statute governing this small-municipality board did not give it fee-award authority.

The board's request referred to a separate attorney-fee provision for civil service boards in larger municipalities. The AG examined the small-municipality law governing Harahan and found no fee-award authority there. It said the board could use the remedies listed in its own statute, including reinstatement and possible retroactive regular pay, but could not add attorney fees.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2004. 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

Harahan civil service board

The AG limited the board to the appeal remedies in LSA-R.S. 33:2561C(1). A finding that discipline lacked good faith and cause did not itself authorize reimbursement of the employee's legal fees.

Appealing police and fire employees

The opinion recognized reinstatement or reemployment and, if the board provided, regular pay retroactive to the disciplinary action. It said the board could not award their attorney fees under the cited small-municipality law.

Common questions

Could the board order the employer to pay the employee's lawyer?

No. The AG found no attorney-fee authority in the statute governing Harahan's board.

Did the result change if the employer's action lacked good faith and cause?

No. The AG expressly said no fee award was authorized even on that finding.

What remedies did the statute give the board?

The opinion quoted powers to affirm discipline, order reinstatement or reemployment with possible retroactive regular pay, or modify the disciplinary order.

Did the AG apply the larger-municipality fee provision to Harahan?

No. The board's request mentioned LSA-R.S. 33:2501.1, but the AG based its answer on the absence of fee authority in the small-municipality law governing Harahan.

Background and statutory framework

The board asked whether it could reimburse an appellant's legal fees after finding a dismissal lacked good faith and cause. Its request mentioned LSA-R.S. 33:2501.1 for larger municipalities. The AG reviewed the Fire and Police Civil Service Law for Small Municipalities and for Parishes and Fire Protection Districts. It quoted LSA-R.S. 33:2561C(1), which listed appeal remedies but contained no attorney-fee provision, and said legislative action would be needed to give Harahan's board fee authority.

Citations and references

• LSA-R.S. 33:2561C(1): Harahan board's appeal remedies quoted in the opinion.
• LSA-R.S. 33:2501.1: larger-municipality provision mentioned in the board's request letter.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/03-0446

Original opinion text

~t~te o~ ~oui~i~
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
P.O. BOX 94005
BATON ROUGE

CHARLES C. FOTI, JR.
70804-9005
ATTORNEY GENERAL
FEB 0 5 2004
Opinion Number 03-0446

11-1-1 MUNICIPAL FIRE & POLICE CIVIL SERVICE LSA-R.S. 33:2561C(1)
Mr. Charles F. Leaumont, Chairman
Harahan Municipal Police and Fire Civil Service Board is
Harahan Municipal Police and
not authorized to award attorney fees to appellant
Fire Civil Service Board
employees, even in situations where the Board
26 West Imperial Drive
determines that the appointing authority’s action was not
taken in good faith for cause.
Harahan, Louisiana 70123

Dear Mr. Leaumont:

Reference is made to your request, on behalf of the Harahan Municipal Police and Fire Civil Service Board (the "Board"), for an opinion of this office regarding the award of legal fees for civil service appeals to the Board. We note that the Board was created, and its authorization and duties are set forth, at LSA-R.S. 33:2531, et seq., known as The Fire and Police Civil Service Law for Small Municipalities and for Parishes and Fire Protection Districts".

Specifically, the Board has directed you to seek an Attorney General’s opinion as to whether or not the Board has the authority to award attorney fees to an appellant if the Board decides that the appointing authority (the employer) did not act for cause and in good faith in connection with the dismissal of an appellant (the employee). Your letter notes that Fire and Police Civil Service Boards for municipalities that are larger than Harahan have such authority, pursuant to LSA-R.S. 33:2501.1, which applies to municipalities with populations between 13,000 and 250,000. Pertinently, with regard to LSA-R.S. 33:2501.1, your letter states:

"It is our understanding that the legislature also passed (or intended to pass) this legislation for small municipalities i.e. Harahan, but we are unable to find the authorization in writing in the law."

Please be advised that our research, and specifically our examination of The Fire and Police Civil Service Law for Small Municipalities and for Parishes and Fire Protection Districts, did not reveal any provision of law which would authorize the Board to award attorney fees to an appealing employee. To the contrary, it appears that the authority of the Board, after conducting the required hearing and investigation of an appeal, is limited to the actions set forth in LSA-R.S. 33:2561C(1), which states:

"After such investigation, if the evidence is conclusive, the board may affirm the action of the appointing authority. If ff finds that the action was

Page 2

Opinion Number 03-0446
Mr. Charles F. Leaumont, Chairman
Harahan Municipal Police and
Fire Civil Service Board
Page -2-

not taken in good faith for cause under the provisions of this Part, the board shall order the immediate reinstatement or reemployment of such person in the office, place, position, or employment from which he was removed, suspended, demoted, or discharged, which reinstatement shall, if the board so provides, be retroactive and entitle him to his regular pay from the time of removal, suspension, demotion, discharge, or other disciplinary action. The board may modify the order of removal, suspension, demotion discharge, or other disciplinary action by directing a suspension without pay for a given period." (Emphasis supplied).

Clearly, LSA-R.S. 33:2561C(1) contains no reference to, and provides no authority for, the Board to award attorney fees. As such, it is our opinion that the Board is not authorized to award attorney fees to appellant employees, even in situations where the Board determines that the appointing authority’s action was not taken in good faith for cause.

Should the Board wish to pursue obtaining the authority to award attorney fees in future cases, we suggest that it seek legislation in this regard.

We trust the foregoing to be of assistance. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if we can be of assistance in other areas of the law.

Yours very truly,

CHARLES C. FOTI, JR.
Attorney General

BARHAM
~ral

CCF, jr./JMZB/dam