Could a Louisiana court reimburse a judge's lawyer fees for fighting a personal subpoena and pursuing contempt proceedings?

Plain-English summary

A Fourteenth Judicial District judge asked whether the court's Judicial Expense Fund could reimburse attorney fees from two disputes: his effort to quash a subpoena to testify in a criminal case and later litigation arising from a contempt proceeding he initiated. In 2006, the Attorney General answered no for both sets of fees under La. R.S. 13:5108.1.

The AG said the subpoena was directed to the judge in his individual capacity and did not concern an act performed as a judge. His fees to resist it therefore fell outside the indemnification provision. The later writ-related fees also stemmed from that subpoena, and the contempt case was brought by the judge, rather than a damages claim brought against him over an official act. Because the statute did not cover either category, the opinion concluded that court payment of the fees would be improper.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2006. 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

Could the court reimburse a judge for a lawyer hired to quash a personal subpoena?

The AG said no on these facts. It found that the subpoena did not relate to actions performed in the judge's official capacity, so the cited indemnification statute did not cover the resulting fees.

Did the judge's objection that the subpoena interfered with judicial duties change the result?

No. The opinion recounted that concern but based its answer on the subpoena's individual-capacity character and lack of connection to an act he performed as a judge.

Could the court pay for the judge's lawyer in the contempt litigation he started?

The AG said no. La. R.S. 13:5108.1 addressed a claim seeking damages against a covered individual over an act in official duties; this was a proceeding the judge initiated, not one brought against him.

Background and statutory framework

The judge described a subpoena from the district attorney's office, a motion to quash, and subsequent sanctions and contempt proceedings. He asked for reimbursement of his attorney fees from the Judicial Expense Fund. The AG quoted La. R.S. 13:5108.1(A)(1), which provided state defense and indemnification against certain damages claims tied to acts during official duties. It applied the statute separately to the subpoena and to the judge-initiated proceeding, finding neither covered. The source header dates the opinion April 25, 2006; its final syllabus prints "April 25, 3006," an apparent date typo preserved below.

Citations

• La. R.S. 13:5108.1 (state defense and indemnification provision).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/05-0302

Original opinion text

April 25, 2006
OPINION NUMBER 05-0302

Honorable Wilford D. Carter
56 JUDGES
Judge, 14th Judicial District Court 90-A-1 PUBLIC FUNDS & CONTRACTS
P.O. Box 3210
R.S. 13:5108.1
Discussion of the payment of a judge’s attorney’s
Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602
fees by the Fourteenth Judicial District Court.

Dear Judge Carter:

You requested an Attorney General’s opinion regarding the payment of legal fees from the Fourteenth Judicial District Court Judicial Expense Fund. You indicated that the attorney’s fees were incurred as the result of your being subpoenaed by the District Attorney’s office to testify in a criminal matter captioned State of Louisiana v. Christopher Balka, No. 8009-04. You were subpoenaed in your personal capacity, but objected to the subpoena because you had no material information regarding that criminal prosecution. As a result of your opposition to the subpoena, you hired an attorney to file a motion to quash the subpoena, as complying with the subpoena would have interfered with your duties as a judge of the Fourteenth Judicial District.

You further advise that your attorney filed a Motion for Sanctions against the District Attorney’s office for improperly issuing the subpoena, to which the court granted an exception of no cause of action in favor of the District Attorney’s office. You subsequently filed a contempt proceeding against the lawyers in connection with the issuance of the subpoena, for filing a motion to recuse after you had recused yourself, and for filing documents containing language insulting to the court. A Rule was issued to show cause why the lawyers should not be held in direct contempt. The District Attorney’s office took writs to the Third Circuit on your contempt rule. The Third Circuit vacated the Rule hearing and your attorney took a writ to the Supreme Court, who reversed the Third Circuit and ordered a contempt hearing be reset for another division of the court. You question whether the Fourteenth Judicial District Court may reimburse you for your attorney’s fees.

The indemnification of officers and employees of the state is governed by La. R.S. 13:5108.1, which provides in pertinent part:

A. Indemnification.

(1) The state shall defend and indemnify a covered individual against any claim, demand, suit, complaint or petition seeking damages filed in any court over alleged negligence or other act by the individual, including any

Page 2

Honorable Wilford D. Carter
OPINION NUMBER 05-0302
Page -2-

demand under any federal statute when the act that forms the basis of the cause of action took place while the individual was engaged in the performance of the duties of the individual's office or employment with the state.

The statute provides for the indemnification of state officers and employees for financial loss arising out of claims, demands, suits or judgments where “the act that forms the basis of the cause of action took place while the individual was engaged in the performance of the duties of the individual’s office or employment with the state”.

With regard to the attorney’s fees for fighting the subpoena, you were subpoenaed in your individual capacity, and the subpoena did not relate to any actions performed in your capacity as a judge. Therefore, you are not entitled to reimbursement of any attorney’s fees arising from your attempt to quash the subpoena.

As for the attorney’s fees related to the writ to the Supreme Court, those fees also arose out of the issuance of the subpoena to you in your individual capacity. Moreover, in order for an individual to be entitled to indemnification, there must be a “claim, demand, suit, complaint or petition seeking damages filed in any court over alleged negligence or other act by the individual”. The statute contemplates that there be some type of proceeding brought against the individual seeking indemnification. The attorney’s fees in question relate to a proceeding brought by you, not a proceeding brought against or directed at you. Further, the proceeding was not brought over acts of negligence or any other act committed by you, which is also required by the statute. As such, you are not entitled to reimbursement of any attorney’s fees arising from the contempt proceeding you initiated.

It is the opinion of our office that, because you are not entitled to reimbursement of your attorney’s fees under La. R.S. 13:5108.1, the payment of such fees by the Fourteenth Judicial District Court would be improper.

Trusting this adequately responds to your request, we remain

Yours very truly,

CHARLES C. FOTI, JR.
ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: ______
KENNETH L. ROCHE, III
Assistant Attorney General
CCF, JR/KLR, III/jv

Page 3

Honorable Wilford D. Carter
OPINION NUMBER 05-0302
Page -3-

OPINION NUMBER 05-0302

56 JUDGES
90-A-1 PUBLIC FUNDS & CONTRACTS
R.S. 13:5108.1

Discussion of the payment of a judge’s attorney’s fees by the Fourteenth Judicial District Court.

Honorable Wilford D. Carter
Judge, 14th Judicial District Court
P.O. Box 3210
Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602

Date Received:

Date Released: April 25, 3006

KENNETH L. ROCHE, III
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL