ILNews

Suits in triple-slaying proceeds case move ahead

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A former Indiana state trooper shouldn't be allowed to claim all $626,000 in insurance and estate proceeds from the deaths of his wife and two children 14 years ago, even though he was acquitted of their murders, attorneys representing the family members argue in civil lawsuits.

Attorneys for the parents of David Camm's late wife filed the suits and argue that some of the money should go toward the family's legal fees for attorney Nick Stein. Stein has represented Frank and Janice Renn since their daughter, Kim Renn, and grandchildren, Brad, 7, and Jill, 5, were slain in September 2000 in their southern Indiana home.

Juries convicted Camm twice on murder charges in the killings. Both convictions were overturned on appeal and Camm was acquitted last fall in the slayings following his third trial.

Camm lawyer David Mosley said during a Tuesday meeting of attorneys for the two sides in Floyd Circuit Judge Terrence Cody's chambers that the money should go to Camm alone.

The Renns and Stein "need to wake up and smell the coffee," Mosley said after Tuesday's meeting, during which three different cases related to three victims' estates were discussed, The Courier-Journal reported. Camm "was acquitted. He did not harm Kim, Brad and Jill," Mosley added.

Stein said Tuesday that if Camm was responsible for the killings, he is not eligible to receive the funds, the News and Tribune reported.

"Being acquitted doesn't mean you didn't do it, it just means that the state didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt you did," he said. "We feel he's responsible for his family's deaths or there wouldn't be any more litigation."

The civil cases involve how to distribute $167,403 held in certificates of deposit in the three estates, and $458,672 from three life insurance policies.

Two suits involving some of the benefits are pending in Cody's court while a third centered on proceeds from two policies related to Kim Camm's job at the former Aegon USA is pending in U.S. District Court in New Albany.

During a recent status conference, Federal Magistrate Judge William G. Hussman Jr. indicated that settling all of the cases together may now be best, Stein said.

He set a settlement conference for Nov. 14.

Even after the civil cases are resolved, it won't end all the litigation spawned by the case. Camm filed notice in April that he intends to sue a string of Floyd County officials for damages stemming from his wrongful convictions. He's seeking $30 million.

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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have dealt with more than a few I-465 moat-protected government attorneys and even judges who just cannot seem to wrap their heads around the core of this 800 year old document. I guess monarchial privileges and powers corrupt still ..... from an academic website on this fantastic "treaty" between the King and the people ... "Enduring Principles of Liberty Magna Carta was written by a group of 13th-century barons to protect their rights and property against a tyrannical king. There are two principles expressed in Magna Carta that resonate to this day: "No freeman shall be taken, imprisoned, disseised, outlawed, banished, or in any way destroyed, nor will We proceed against or prosecute him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land." "To no one will We sell, to no one will We deny or delay, right or justice." Inspiration for Americans During the American Revolution, Magna Carta served to inspire and justify action in liberty’s defense. The colonists believed they were entitled to the same rights as Englishmen, rights guaranteed in Magna Carta. They embedded those rights into the laws of their states and later into the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution ("no person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.") is a direct descendent of Magna Carta's guarantee of proceedings according to the "law of the land." http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/magna_carta/

  2. I'm not sure what's more depressing: the fact that people would pay $35,000 per year to attend an unaccredited law school, or the fact that the same people "are hanging in there and willing to follow the dean’s lead in going forward" after the same school fails to gain accreditation, rendering their $70,000 and counting education worthless. Maybe it's a good thing these people can't sit for the bar.

  3. Such is not uncommon on law school startups. Students and faculty should tap Bruce Green, city attorney of Lufkin, Texas. He led a group of studnets and faculty and sued the ABA as a law student. He knows the ropes, has advised other law school startups. Very astute and principled attorney of unpopular clients, at least in his past, before Lufkin tapped him to run their show.

  4. Not that having the appellate records on Odyssey won't be welcome or useful, but I would rather they first bring in the stray counties that aren't yet connected on the trial court level.

  5. Aristotle said 350 bc: "The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.

ADVERTISEMENT