Can Louisiana's CPA board sue to enforce a restitution order against a licensee?

Plain-English summary

The State Board of Certified Public Accountants asked whether it could use public funds to sue a licensee or privilege holder who did not comply with a board restitution order. The Attorney General said the Accountancy Act gives the board no power to obtain judicial enforcement of a restitution obligation.

The opinion drew a line between enforcing an order in court and using restitution as part of professional discipline. La. R.S. 37:79(C) permits a court action for the board's costs, fees, and fines, and subsection (D) permits an injunction to enforce a cease and desist order. Neither provision includes restitution. Yet subsection (B)(4) lets the board impose another appropriate disciplinary requirement. The AG read that clause to allow the board to require a licensee to demonstrate payment of restitution and to condition the ability to keep practicing on payment.

What this means for you

Louisiana CPA board members

The opinion did not find authority for a lawsuit seeking collection of restitution, whether the order came from the board or another body. It did find authority to make demonstration of payment part of a disciplinary remedy and to condition continued practice on payment.

Licensed accountants facing discipline

A restitution condition in a disciplinary matter may affect continued practice under the opinion's reading of section 37:79(B)(4). The opinion does not say that the board itself can obtain a court judgment for the restitution amount.

Common questions

Q: Can the Louisiana CPA board take a licensee to court to collect restitution?
A: The AG said no. The Accountancy Act specifies which board orders can be enforced in court, and restitution is not among them.

Q: Can the board require a CPA to prove restitution was paid?
A: Yes. The opinion treats proof of payment as an appropriate disciplinary requirement under section 37:79(B)(4).

Q: Can the board enforce someone else's restitution order?
A: The opinion found no express legislative grant allowing the board to enforce a restitution order issued by another administrative or judicial body.

Q: Which CPA board orders can go to court under the statute discussed?
A: The opinion identified court enforcement of board imposed costs, fees, or fines under section 37:79(C), and injunctive enforcement of cease and desist orders under section 37:79(D).

Background and statutory framework

The opinion relied on the limits of an administrative agency's delegated authority. It read section 37:79(B)(4)'s allowance for other appropriate disciplinary actions alongside the specific judicial remedies in subsections (C) and (D). The distinction explains why a license condition tied to restitution is available while a suit to collect restitution is not.

Citations and references

• La. R.S. 37:79(B)(4), concerning other disciplinary requirements.
• La. R.S. 37:79(C), concerning enforcement of costs, fees, and fines.
• La. R.S. 37:79(D), concerning cease and desist orders.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/24-0074

Original opinion text

STATE OF LOUISIANA
DEPARmI:NI OF JUSTICE
OvvI’E 01’ THE AToINEy GIxERL
P0. BOx 94005
BToN ROUGE, LA
70804-9005

Liz MuRRILL
ATToRNEY GENERAL
June 13, 2024
OPINION 24-0074

Lisa Benefield
i ACCOUNTANTS
Executive Director
La R.S.37:71 et seq
State Board of Certified Public
Accountants of Louisiana
The Louisiana Accountancy Act does not authorize the State
Board of Certified Public Accountants of Louisiana to seek judicial
601 Poydras Street, Ste. I 77
enforcement of a Board order requiring a licensee or privilege
New Orleans Louisiana 701 30
holder to pay restitution. However, the Board may add
demonstration of restitution as part of any disciplinary remedy it imposed. The Board may condition the licensee’s ability to
Dear Ms. Benefield : continue to practice on payment of such restitution.

Our office received your request for an opinion regarding the State Board of Certified Public Accountants of Louisiana’s (‘Board”) disciplinary authority under the Louisiana Accountancy Act, La. R.S. 37:71, et seq (the “Act”). You ask whether a Board order requiring a licensee or privilege holder to pay restitution may be enforced by using public funds to bring an action in a court of competent jurisdiction and proper venue.

It is the opinion ofthis office that the Board has no authority to judicially seek enforcement of an order of restitution.

The CPA Board is responsible for overseeing the practice of CPAs and CPA firms within Louisiana, by regulating CPA education and practice in accordance with the legislative intent and purpose pursuant to La. R.S. 37:72, et. seq.

We begin our analysis of your request by examining the language ofthe statute governing licensee discipline, La. R.S 37:79.1 “When a law is clear and unambiguous and its application does not lead to absurd consequences, the law shall be applied as written and no further interpretation may be made in search of the intent of the Legislature.” Pumphrey v. CityofNew Orleans, 2005-0979 (La. 4/4/06); 925 So.2d 1202, 1209-10.

The grounds for disciplinary actions of CPAs are delineated in La. R.S. 37:79, which authorizes the Board to revoke, suspend, or refuse to issue or renew any certificate or permit for the reasons enumerated in the statute.2 The Board is also authorized to

1
The appropriate starting point of statutory interpretation is the language of the statute itself. In re Louis/aria Health Serv. & Indem, Co., 98-3034 (La. 10/19/99), 749 So,2d 610, 615 (‘. legislative intent is . .

not the appropriate starting point for statutory interpretation.”) citing, Touchard v. Williams, 61 7 So2d 885, 888 (La. 1993).
2 The statute lists thirteen grounds for disciplinary action, including fraud, perjury, or deceit in obtaining or in renewing a certificate, permit, or privilege; dishonesty, fraud, or gross negligence in the performance of services while holding a certificate, license, privilege, or in the filing or failure to file that individual’s own income tax returns; and providing false testimony before the board.

Page 2

OPINION 24-0074
Ms. Lisa Benefield
Page 2

reprimand, place on probation, censure, limit the scope of practice of, or impose an administrative fine on any licensee. La. R.S. 37:79(A). In lieu of or in addition to any of the foregoing remedies the Board may impose additional requirements, including but not limited to, requiring a licensee to “[c]omply with any other requirement or action the board may deem appropriate.” La. R.S. 37:79(B). The catchall, “any other requirement,” language in La. R.S. 37:79(B)(4) suggests that, if deemed appropriate by the Board, demonstrating payment of restitution would be an authorized disciplinary remedy under the plain language of the Act.

Nor is the Board granted authority to judicially enforce an order of restitution issued by another administrative or judicial body. An administrative agency only has the authority expressly granted by the legislature. Hawkins v. State, Through Department of Health and Hospitals, 613 So.2d 229, 234 (La. App. I Cir. 1992). The legislature has provided the Board no express grant of authority to enforce a restitution order imposed by another board or by a court, and no inherent power to enforce restitution orders may be implied from the statutes.

The Act contains authorization to enforce two types of Board orders. First, the plain language of La. R.S. 37:79(C) authorizes the Board to seek judicial enforcement of orders imposing, exclusively, “costs, fees, or fines” imposed by the Board. The fines are set forth in La. R.S 37:79(A) as “administrative fines not to exceed two thousand dollars per violation.” Costs and fees are defined in La. R.S. 37:79(B)(3). Second, by writ of injunction, the Board may seek judicial enforcement of any order directing a person or firm to cease and desist any activity, conduct, or practice constituting a violation of the Act, under La. R.S. 37:79(D).

Nevertheless, because demonstrating payment of restitution is an authorized disciplinary remedy under the plain language of La. R.S. 37:79(B)(4), it is the opinion of this office that the Board may legitimately add demonstration of restitution as part of any disciplinary remedy it imposed under La. R.S. 37:79(A). Furthermore, the Board may condition the licensee’s ability to continue to practice on payment of such restitution.

We hope that this opinion has adequately addressed the legal issues you have raised. If our office can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

With best regards,

LIZ MURRILL
ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY:___
CHIMENE ST. AMANT
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
LM:CS