Indiana’s (legally) good for business

March 23, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Here’s a way to lure businesses to our state: We’ve got one of the best legal climates in the country!



A survey released this week by the U.S. Chamber’s Institute for Legal Reform ranks Indiana fourth in the nation for best lawsuit climates. We’ve ranked in the top 10 of the list the past couple of years.



The results are based on interviews with general counsels, senior attorneys, or executives in companies with at least $100 million in revenue. The respondents ranked states for their overall treatment of tort, contract, and class-action liability. They were also asked to rank states for the impartiality and competence of its judges and the fairness of juries.



Here’s how Indiana ranks in a few key areas:



We rank No. 1 in damages, third in treatment of class-action suits and mass consolidation suits, fourth in juries’ fairness, sixth in judges’ impartiality, and ninth in judges’ competence. You can view complete results here.



Joining us at the top of the list are Delaware, North Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa. The states with the worst legal climates for business include California, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and West Virginia.



According to the survey, the state’s legal climate affects how and where companies do business. Two-thirds of respondents reported the state’s lawsuit environment is likely to impact important business decisions, such as where to locate or expand.

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

  2. 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?

  3. 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"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT