ILNews

Attorney fees not recoverable under adult wrongful death statute

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals today disagreed about an issue of first impression regarding recovery of attorney fees under the adult wrongful death statute.

In Jeffery H. McCabe, As Representative of the Estate of Jean Francis McCabe, Decedent v. Commissioner, Indiana Department of Insurance as Administrator of the Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund, No. 49A02-0908-CV-728, Jeffrey McCabe appealed the grant of partial summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner, Indiana Department of Insurance as Administrator of the Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund. The trial court had ruled attorney fees and expenses incurred by the attorney representing the personal representative of a wrongful death estate are not recoverable damages under the state adult wrongful death statute.

The appellate court noted Indiana has three separate causes of action for the wrongful death of an individual: a general wrongful death statute, a statute pertaining to the wrongful death of children, and the adult wrongful death statute. The primary difference for the purposes of this appeal is that the GWDS and the CWDS specifically provide for reasonable attorney fees, but the AWDS does not address the matter.

Jean Francis McCabe died Oct. 1, 2003, from an methotrexate overdose negligently administered to her by medical providers at the long-term care facility where she lived. Jeffrey McCabe is her only child and a nondependent.

McCabe filed a proposed complaint in December 2003 with the Department of Insurance pursuant to the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act. The matter was presented to a medical review panel; shortly thereafter, the care facility settled all claims with McCabe for an amount that would allow further proceedings against the Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund.

As the personal representative of his mother’s estate, McCabe filed his petition to determine the amount of excess damages against the fund Sept. 23, 2008. Through discovery, McCabe clarified that in addition to seeking recovery for the loss of his mother’s love and companionship, medical expenses, funeral and burial expenses, he also sought repayment of costs and expenses, including attorney fees, for the administration of the wrongful death estate and prosecution of the wrongful death claim.

The fund filed a motion for partial summary judgment April 7, 2009, on the issue of recoverable damages, seeking to limit the recovery to damages specifically allowed under the AWDS.

The trial court ruled in June 2009 that attorney fees, costs, and expenses are not recoverable under AWDS. The appellate court accepted jurisdiction Oct. 14, 2009, of McCabe’s interlocutory appeal.

McCabe relied on Hillebrand v. Supervised Estate of Large, 914 N.E.2d 846 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), but the appellate court noted Hillebrand is distinguishable from the instant case because it was a probate case deciding from which probate assets attorney fees incurred should be paid, and it precedes both the CWDS and the AWDS.

Also, it noted that the Indiana Supreme Court recently concluded in Butler v. Indiana Department of Insurance, 904 N.E.2d 198, 202 (Ind. 2009),  that the “include but not limited to” language does not expand the class of necessitated expenses.

“While we acknowledge that this inconsistency is troubling, we believe such inconsistency is the result of public policy considerations that are the prerogative of the General Assembly,” wrote Judge Paul Mathias, with whom Judge Cale Bradford concurred.

Judge Patricia Riley dissented, writing, “In light of the Estate of Kuba (508 N.E.2d 1, 2 (Ind. 1987)), Butler, and Hillebrand, I would hold that reasonable attorney fees are recoverable damages under the AWDS.”

Judge Riley noted that unlike the majority’s opinion, hers produces a harmonious result between the GWDS, AWDS, and CWDS.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT