Moore v. East Baton Rouge Parish Government — writ granted; nonjoinder ruling reversed

Case
Hillar C. Moore, III, in his official capacity as District Attorney for East Baton Rouge Parish v. East Baton Rouge Parish Government, by and through the Parish of East Baton Rouge Metropolitan Council Members, in their official capacities, and Emile “Sid” Edwards, in his official capacity as Mayor-President of East Baton Rouge
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit
Judge
Wolfe (elected 2020); Stromberg (elected 2024)
Date Decided
August 10, 2026
Docket No.
2026 CW 0828
Topics
mandamus; district attorney funding; nonjoinder; local government
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Hillar C. Moore, III, acting in his official capacity as District Attorney for East Baton Rouge Parish, sought supervisory review in litigation against the East Baton Rouge Parish Government, Metropolitan Council members, and the Mayor-President.

The district court granted the Parish’s exception of nonjoinder and ordered Moore to amend his petition. Moore sought writ review of those portions of the July 13, 2026 judgment.

The Court’s Holding

The First Circuit granted the writ, reversed the portions of the district court judgment granting the exception of nonjoinder and requiring amendment of the petition, and denied the exception.

Louisiana Revised Statute 16:6 imposes a mandatory duty on parish police juries to fund qualifying expenses incurred by district attorneys acting officially. Mandamus is an appropriate means to compel performance of that duty. Although East Baton Rouge Parish has no police jury, the court concluded that the statute likewise applies to its Metropolitan Council as the parish’s governing body. The statute does not apply to municipalities.

Key Takeaways

  • La. R.S. 16:6 creates a mandatory funding duty for covered district-attorney expenses.
  • Mandamus may compel the parish governing body’s performance of that funding duty.
  • East Baton Rouge’s Metropolitan Council is subject to the statute in place of a police jury.

Why It Matters

The decision confirms that a parish governing body cannot avoid its statutory funding obligation to the district attorney’s office through the absence of a traditional police-jury structure. It also clears the procedural nonjoinder ruling that had required amendment of the district attorney’s petition.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top