ILNews

Complex wrongful-death legal fee appeal puzzles judges

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Judges on a panel of the Indiana Court of Appeals were stumped at times Friday in a case regarding legal fees due from the Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund to the estate of a woman who won a wrongful death judgment after she died from burns at a care facility.

“You’ve basically just lost me,” Judge Melissa May said at one point to attorney Dan Robinson, who sought to explain why the estate should receive $50,440 in attorney fees from the PCF as was ordered by a Marion Superior judge. Robinson, a member of Gray Robinson Ryan & Fox P.C. in Indianapolis, represents the adult children of the estate of Mable Cochran in Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Judy Holcomb, 49A05-1207-CC-340. Watch the oral argument here.

Susan Cline, a Lewis Wagner LLP partner representing the Patient’s Compensation Fund, argued that legal fees awarded from the fund are clearly capped at 15 percent of total damages under I.C. 34-18-18-1.
 
“The Patient Compensation Fund asks that this case be remanded back to the trial court,” Cline said, with an order for damages for legal fees reduced to $17,852.

Beyond the $250,000 policy coverage limit, the estate also was entitled to $101,166.89 from the PCF based on provisions of a settlement, which the fund paid. Attorneys took a fee of 40 percent from that amount, pursuant to their contract with the client, according to testimony. Robinson told the judges the legal fees of $50,440 from the fund would go directly to the estate.

Judge Rudy Pyle III and Chief Judge Margret Robb also appeared to wrestle with the conflicting formulas for legal fee awards from the fund and whether the 15 percent cap should apply. Cline acknowledged that a formula proposed for awarding legal fees from the fund wasn’t found in statutes, but represented an attempt to reconcile recent caselaw with statutes.

But Robinson and Johnson Jensen LLP attorney Robert W. Johnson, representing the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association, argued that the award was justified under the adult wrongful death statute, I.C. 34-23-1-2. The fee would have been subject to the 15 percent cap under medical malpractice statutes, he said.

“Attorney fees as damages are totally different from what the attorney charges his client,” Johnson said. He noted estates are afforded protections from excessive legal fees through probate court.

But Cline warned that allowing the lower court award of legal fees to stand could create unforeseen hardships for the fund. “You create the windfall with no place to go.”

Struggling to find the heart of the case, Robb seemed to reach an epiphany at one point in the oral arguments that ran about 20 minutes longer than the time typically granted. She quipped, “It’s clear as mud, now.”

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. 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?

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  4. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  5. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

ADVERTISEMENT