ILNews

100 tort claim notices filed in State Fair stage collapse

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Note: This story has been updated to reflect the most recent numbers released by the Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

As of Nov. 2, the Office of the Indiana Attorney General has received 100 tort claim notices related to the stage collapse at the Indiana State Fair in August. The deadline for submission of the tort claim form was Nov. 1.

Bryan Corbin, litigation public information officer for the AG’s office, said the number may increase slightly because the office will accept any claims postmarked by midnight Nov. 1.

Of the 100 claims, 49 were re-filed using the tort claim form created by Kenneth Feinberg. Before the form was created, some had sent tort claim notice letters or used the standard Indiana tort claim form.

Corbin said some of the original claims were submitted jointly by multiple members of the same family, so they were asked to re-file for each injured member. The attorney general’s claims management staff will be reviewing the claim notices and following up for any additional documents, such as medical records, that may be needed.

The timeline for filing a tort claim notice was informally shortened in order to expedite the payment process. Corbin said the office heard from people that they wanted to be compensated now for the injuries, not years from now. Claimants legally still have 270 days from the Aug. 13 incident to file a tort claim notice.

Those who filed claim notices are seeking payment from the $5 million Indiana Tort Claim Fund. Seven people died and more than 40 people were injured in the stage collapse at the Sugarland concert Aug. 13. Some lawmakers have indicated they would like to consider raising the $5 million cap to address the needs of the victims in this incident or whether it should be raised in general, although it appears unlikely that the matter will be heard during the 2012 legislative session.

A Valparaiso attorney has filed a federal class-action lawsuit challenging the cap on grounds that it violates due process and equal protection because it denies individuals their fair share.

A relief fund was established by the Indiana State Fair Commission to distribute money to victims of the collapse, providing between $3,000 and $25,000 per injured person, depending on the length of stay in a hospital, and $35,000 for death claims.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT