Louisiana’s Justice of the Peace court system, which handles thousands of evictions annually, is the subject of a federal lawsuit and a recent media investigation examining its practice of compensating judges directly from court fees. Housing advocates and legal experts have raised concerns that the structure creates a potential conflict of interest, while state officials maintain the courts provide an important legal service.
The state’s 390 justices of the peace, or JPs, are part-time officials required to have a high school diploma. They preside over small claims, wage garnishments, and eviction proceedings. Unlike judges in most other court systems, Louisiana JPs are compensated directly from the filing fees charged for cases heard in their courts, including eviction fees that can be $150 or more.
A nine-month investigation published by The Guardian analyzed over 11,000 pages of eviction records and 3,400 financial disclosure forms. The report found that some JPs earn substantial incomes derived largely from these fees.
According to the report’s analysis of public records, Justice of the Peace Chuck Cusimano II of Jefferson Parish retained $380,929 from court fees in 2025. With an additional parish salary of $21,600, his total compensation exceeded $400,000. For comparison, the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court earned a salary of approximately $317,000 that year.
The Guardian’s data showed that from June 2025 to May 2026, Cusimano’s court processed nearly 3,300 eviction cases. The analysis also found that a single landlord, 1st Lake Properties, was the plaintiff in over 60% of those cases.
In an interview with The Guardian, Cusimano stated he did not see a conflict of interest in the fee-based system. “It’s fee based, and they pay upfront to us, irrespective of the outcome,” he said, attributing the high case volume to the large number of apartment complexes in his district.
The system is also being challenged in federal court. The Southern Poverty Law Center and the National Housing Law Project have filed a class-action lawsuit alleging the compensation model is unconstitutional. The lawsuit claims the financial structure “creates an incentive for [judges] to maximize the number of eviction cases filed in his court by ruling in favor of landlords.”
Lisa Foster, a retired California appeals judge and former director of the office for access to justice at the U.S. Department of Justice, told The Guardian she believed the system is “blatantly unconstitutional,” citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent regarding a judge’s direct financial interest in a case’s outcome.
The Louisiana Attorney General’s office has defended the system. In a recent public statement, Attorney General Liz Murrill said the state’s justices of the peace “play a vital role in serving our communities and upholding the rule of law” by “providing access to justice close to home.”
The scrutiny extends beyond a single court. Financial disclosures reviewed by The Guardian showed that the state’s 10 highest-revenue JP courts collected nearly $31 million in fees over the past decade. The investigation also documented instances of other JPs facing disciplinary action. Justice Tracy Batieste of East Baton Rouge resigned in December 2025 after a state judiciary commission found probable cause that she was charging unlawful fees. Another East Baton Rouge justice, Mark Miley, signed a deferred discipline agreement after admitting he had presided over cases outside his jurisdiction.
Following Miley’s reprimand, the Louisiana state legislature passed a bill in June that expanded the geographical boundaries of his district and others in East Baton Rouge.
Cusimano announced he will retire at the end of his term. His son, Chuck Cusimano III, is the only candidate who has filed to run for the position.
