La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 51:2231 (2026)

Statement of purpose; limitation on prohibitions against discrimination because of age

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

CHAPTER 38. LOUISIANA COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

§2231. Statement of purpose; limitation on prohibitions against discrimination because of age

            A. It is the purpose and intent of the legislature by this enactment to provide for execution within Louisiana of the policies embodied in the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1968, and 1972 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended; and to assure that Louisiana has appropriate legislation prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations sufficient to justify the deferral of cases by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the secretary of Louisiana Works, and the Department of Justice under those statutes; to safeguard all individuals within the state from discrimination because of race, creed, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin in connection with employment and in connection with public accommodations; to protect their interest in personal dignity and freedom from humiliation; to make available to the state their full productive capacities in employment; to secure the state against domestic strife and unrest which would menace its democratic institutions; to preserve the public safety, health, and general welfare; and to further the interest, rights, and privileges within the state.

            B. The prohibitions in this Chapter against discrimination because of age in connection with public accommodations shall be limited to individuals who are at least forty years of age.

            C. The Louisiana Commission on Human Rights shall have enforcement powers including adjudication of claims of discrimination prohibited by Chapter 3-A of Title 23 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, and pay discrimination prohibited by R.S. 23:664.

            Acts 1988, No. 886, §1; Acts 1993, No. 820, §9; Acts 1997, No. 1409, §3, eff. Aug. 1, 1997; Acts 2008, No. 743, §7, eff. July 1, 2008; Acts 2014, No. 702, §2; Acts 2014, No. 756, §1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 85 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case: Smith v. Bd. of Comm'rs of the La. Stadium, 385 F. Supp. 3d 491 (E.D. La. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Smith v. Bd. of Comm'rs of the La. Stadium, 385 F. Supp. 3d 491 (E.D. La. 2019). · cites it 7× “The Court found France, sued in his official capacity, is entitled to sovereign immunity on Plaintiff's damages claim against him.”
Martin v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana, Inc., 132 F. Supp. 3d 794 (M.D. La. 2015). · cites it 4× “R.S. § 51:2231 (C). When Plaintiff filed charges with LCHR, she simultaneously filed a charge with the EEOC.”
Devillier v. Fid. & Deposit Co. of Md., 709 So. 2d 277 (La. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 11× “R.S. 51:2231, et seq., prohibiting discrimination because of age and sex and retaliation for opposing illegal employment practices.”
Eastin v. Entergy Corp., 42 So. 3d 1163 (La. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “R.S. 51:2231, the Louisiana Commission on Human Rights Act (“LCHRA”).”
Salard v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc., 904 F. Supp. 569 (W.D. La. 1995). · cites it 12× “§ 23:1006 (West 1995), 1 which was enacted in 1983 and is the named statutory basis of the plaintiffs claim in the instant case.”
Johnson v. Hosp. Corp. of Am., 767 F. Supp. 2d 678 (W.D. La. 2011). · cites it 2× “Englehardt); see also Hornsby v. Enterprise Transportation Co., 987 F.”
Eastin v. Entergy Corp., 710 So. 2d 835 (La. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “R.S. 51:2231 et seq. The individual defendants are alleged to have engaged in a systematic, unlawful discrimination against older experienced employees in favor of younger less experienced employees.”
Duplessis v. Warren Petroleum, Inc., 672 So. 2d 1019 (La. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3× “R.S. 51:2231 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
Sims v. Brown & Root Indus. Servs., Inc., 889 F. Supp. 920 (W.D. La. 1995). · cites it 3× “R.S. § 51:2231. She claims that a hostile work environment existed at Brown & Root; and that Brossett’s pre-employment conduct offering employment for sex and his decision to reduce her pay once it became clear to him that she would not have sex with him was quid pro quo sexual…”
Clark v. City of Alexandria, 116 F.4th 472 (5th Cir. 2024). “R.S. 51:2231; (2) a hostile work environment under Title VII; and (3) retal- iation in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, § 1983, and the Louisiana whistleblower statute, La.”
Smith v. Par. of Washington, 318 F. Supp. 2d 366 (E.D. La. 2004). · cites it 2× “Section 51:2231(A) of the act provides that one of the goals of the Act was to have Louisiana recognized as a deferral state under federal law and under the rules and regulations of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”
Alcorn v. City of Baton Rouge, 898 So. 2d 385 (La. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “R.S. 51:2231. [4] Therefore, the 300-day filing period applies to the plaintiffs' federal claims.”
Show all 85 citing cases →
La. Rev. Stat. § 51:2231(A): 9 cases
Martin v. Winn-Dixie Louisiana, Inc., 132 F. Supp. 3d 794 (M.D. La. 2015). “R.S. § 51:2231 (C). When Plaintiff filed charges with LCHR, she simultaneously filed a charge with the EEOC.”
Smith v. Par. of Washington, 318 F. Supp. 2d 366 (E.D. La. 2004). “Section 51:2231(A) of the act provides that one of the goals of the Act was to have Louisiana recognized as a deferral state under federal law and under the rules and regulations of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”
Smith v. Bd. of Comm'rs of the La. Stadium, 385 F. Supp. 3d 491 (E.D. La. 2019). “The Court found France, sued in his official capacity, is entitled to sovereign immunity on Plaintiff's damages claim against him.”
Aultman v. Entergy Corp., 747 So. 2d 1151 (La. Ct. App. 1999).
Albright v. S. Trace Country Club, 879 So. 2d 121 (La. 2004).
La. Rev. Stat. § 51:2231(C): 3 cases
Alcorn v. City of Baton Rouge, 898 So. 2d 385 (La. Ct. App. 2004). “R.S. 51:2231. [4] Therefore, the 300-day filing period applies to the plaintiffs' federal claims.”
Lee v. Constar, Inc., 921 So. 2d 1240 (La. Ct. App. 2006).
Dresser, Inc. v. Lowry, 320 F. Supp. 2d 486 (W.D. La. 2004).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.