Two central Indiana attorneys have filed a challenge to Indiana's Medical Malpractice Cap, arguing the cap violates the
Indiana Constitution. The challenge follows a jury verdict in which a widower won $8.5 million following his wife's
death.
Attorneys John Muller of the Indianapolis firm Montross Miller Muller Mendelson & Kennedy, and Michael Stephenson of
McNeely Stephenson Thopy & Harrold in Shelbyville, filed an objection on Sept. 11 to reduction of the jury's verdict
on behalf of Timothy W. Plank in Marion Circuit Court. Plank's wife, Debra, died following surgery at Community North
Hospital in Indianapolis.
She went to the hospital's emergency room three times complaining of abdominal pains, and was admitted Nov. 13, 2001.
The hospital misplaced an X-ray that showed a small bowel obstruction. Her treating doctors didn't know of the obstruction.
When surgery was finally performed, the surgeon discovered part of her intestines had died. Debra was put on life support
and died Dec. 1, 2001.
Shortly after his wife's death, the hospital contacted Plank with a customer satisfaction survey and wanted to talk to
her about her care in the hospital. He filed suit against the doctor and Community Hospitals of Indiana and won an $8.5 million
jury verdict on Sept. 3, 2009. If the jury verdict stands, Plank intends to donate a substantial portion of it to a scholarship
in Debra's name, Muller said.
The hospital requested that the jury verdict be reduced to $1.25 million pursuant to Indiana Code 34-18-14-3.
Plank's attorneys contend that the statute violates Section 20 of the Indiana Constitution, which reads "In all
civil cases, the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate," and Section 23, which reads "The General Assembly
shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities upon which, upon the same terms, shall not
equally belong to all citizens."
Muller said that there was a 1980 case which challenged the overall constitutionality of the Medical Malpractice Act, but
there wasn't a challenge specific to the cap as this case contemplates. In Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital ,
273 Ind. 374, 404 N.E.2d 585 (1980), the Indiana Supreme Court determined the occurrence-based statute of limitations contained
in the act was constitutional. In that case, the high court was only asked to decide whether the automatic admission of medical
review panel opinions interfered with the judicial power to generally admit evidence.














I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.