Hearing set in BR on Jackson Parish Hospital Lawsuit

An August 30 hearing has been scheduled in 19th Judicial (East Baton Rouge Parish) District Court in Baton Rouge to rule on whether an injunction will be granted that would declare Act 171 unconstitutional. Originally, the hearing was set for 9:30 AM this morning.

The hearing will be in Judge Timothy Kelly’s courtroom.

See here the court documents.

The injunction would prevent the Jackson Parish Police Jury (JPPJ) from appointing members to the Jackson Parish Parish Hospital Board of Directors in accordance with the act.

The legislation, signed by Governor John Bell Edwards last June, restructures the hospital’s governing board to five members from seven, and places qualifications on new appointees. Several new appointments have been made to the board, which recently met.

Plaintiffs claim in the suit that the legislation deprives them of equal protection of the law in violation of the U. S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

Plaintiffs in the suit include Herbert Simmons and Windy Calahan; and two police jurors, Maxie Monroe and John McCarty.

Representing the plaintiffs is Baton Rouge attorney Ernest Johnson.

Defendants include Gov. Edwards and the Jackson Parish Police Jury.

Last week, the jury hired Alexandria law firm Gold Weems to represent them.

12 Responses to “Hearing set in BR on Jackson Parish Hospital Lawsuit”

  1. Barbara Johns, Licensed CLINICAL Social Worker Says:

    As a longtime member of this board, who was also forced off the board, I think this law is discriminatory towards 99% of the population as it states one member has to be a lawyer, one a CPA, one a medical practitioner or doctor, one a banker, and one a manager at the mill. Why not a teacher? The school board employs more people than the paper mIll. How does a manager at the mill qualify one to make health decisions?

  2. Anonymous Says:

    i think it strange that 2 jury members sued the same jury they serve on. Think its time to replace the jury. So sad

    • Anonymous Says:

      also curious as to how much its costing the Jury in legal fees? maybe the 2 who are listed on the suit should forgo their salary until the case is settled.

  3. On The Outside Looking In Says:

    When the jury goes into executive session to discuss pending litigation do the two jurors suing the jury (and themselves) get to listen to the discussion? Seems like that would be a conflict of interest and would allow the petitioners to have insight into the defense strategy.

  4. Anonymous Says:


  5. Anonymous Says:

    The long standing board members should’ve already been replaced. Limits should be placed on how long they can serve so that you don’t have the same ones on it for years and years.

  6. Oldman Says:

    I bet the people with the entitlement mentality win again.

  7. Anonymous Says:

    I hope they don’t call anyone from the old board to testify it they do it could really get very nasty for the Police Jurors

  8. Anonymous Says:

    Why is Jim Fannin not named in this suit. He fathered the bill. He always sets a fire then sneaks out the back door.

  9. Anonymous Says:

    any news on how the hearing went?

  10. Wesley Kurt Dwayne Says:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: