ILNews

Governor signs JTAC, workers’ comp bills into law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Division of State Court Administration’s Judicial Technology and Automation Committee will see a temporary boost in funding for its Odyssey case management system under a new law signed by Gov. Mike Pence.

House Enrolled Act 1393 increases the civil filing fee dedicated for Odyssey from $5 to $7 for two years. After that, it will drop back to the $5 level. The new law also creates an oversight committee that will report to the Legislature on matters such as whether funding for Odyssey should be extended.

Counties that do not use Odyssey will use that fee for the operation and maintenance of their systems.

Pence signed the legislation this weekend, but held a ceremonial signing at 2 p.m. Monday in his office.

Pence also signed HEA 1320 Saturday, which reconfigures the state’s workers’ compensation laws. It increases nonmedical workers’ compensation caps to $390,000 per injury for injuries occurring after July 1, 2014. It increases the average weekly wage used to calculate compensation for nonmedical temporary partial or total disability, and for total permanent disability. On or after July 1, 2014, the average weekly wage used will increase $195 to $1,170.

The new law also urges the Legislative Council to assign to the interim study committee on insurance the study of workers’ compensation and occupational disease compensation topics, including minimum payment amounts for services or products provided by medical service facilities, payments for implants, and the establishment and membership of a committee to advise the Worker’s Compensation Board in the administration of a workers’ comp and occupational diseases compensation program.

 

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT