General Assembly reaches midpoint

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

At the midway point in this Indiana General Assembly session, dozens of bills died this week when one house didn't vote on them while others moved on for further consideration.

An Indiana Lawyer review of the legislation listed on the state legislature's Web site shows that 135 of 420 Senate bills and 104 of 391 House bills survived, though many bills mirrored similar measures or have even been merged into other legislation that's moved on. The totals include numerous vehicle bills that could have been used for particular issues if needed as the legislative session progressed.

Some pieces of legislation that died involved court reporting licensing, an oversight commission for the state's judicial computer systems, and a resolution involving judicial mandates. One bill that would have dubbed any non-attorneys' illegal practice of law as racketeering activity survived a House committee but didn't get a final vote, to the surprise of the those in the legal community watching the legislation.

But various bills moved on, including legislation that would: expand the statutory framework for problem-solving courts, repeal a 2009 special session change giving the Indiana Department of Child Services more authority on out-of-state placements, revise the state's grandparent visitation laws, allow Marion County to convert all of its commissioners into magistrates at no expense to the state, expand the authority of the Attorney General's Office and Solicitor General in various ways, and allow magistrates statewide to serve as part-time senior judges. A bill that would revise Indiana's rights of publicity statue and create an interim commission to study that issue more in-depth also continues to move.

Even in the tough budget times, when some courts held off requesting new judicial officers and resources, lawmakers approved the only request for a new court that came before it so far this session: HB 1269. It would both unify the Clark Circuit and Superior courts and also create a new Bartholomew Superior Court in July 2011 and pay for it using a fee of at least $20 on each traffic infraction. Lawmakers had expressed concern previously because it could change how the state handles the state court funding, but the bill passed the House unanimously by a 98-0 vote.

One close vote on a legal-related bill was with HB 1255, which involves proof of collateral-source payments and would prohibit a court from admitting into evidence any write-off, discount, or other deduction associated with a collateral-source payment in a personal injury or wrongful death action. This topic was the subject of an Indiana Supreme Court decision last year in Stanley v. Walker, 906 N.E.2d 852 (Ind. 2009), which held that the state's collateral source statute doesn't bar evidence of discounted amounts to determine the reasonable value of medical services provided to plaintiffs in those actions. The bill made it out of committee, and representatives voted 57-40 to send it to the Senate.

Now, the opposite house of the General Assembly must consider all legislation, and some issues that have died already could be weaved into bills that are still alive. Committee meetings begin again next week, and each side has until March 3 to take a final vote on legislation and then, if necessary, work out final details in conference committees before the session ends March 14.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.