ILNews

Wrongful death statute allows for attorney fees, other costs

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Compensation for attorney fees and other costs can be awarded under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute, ruled a Court of Appeals panel today.

In the case relying on the interpretation of the Adult Wrongful Death Statute, the appellate court affirmed the Marion Superior Court ruling in Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Beverly S. Brown, et al., No. 49A02-1001-CT-80.

Beverly S. Brown, as executor of the estate of her sister, Barbara J. Frieden, had settled a medical malpractice claim for the statutory limit after Frieden died of a heart attack. She then petitioned the Indiana Patient’s Compensation Fund for additional compensation. The trial court awarded $278,377.55, which included compensation for attorney fees, litigation costs, estate administration costs, and loss of services to their parents. The fund appealed, arguing that those damages were not authorized under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute.

Judge Terry Crone wrote the panel agrees with Hematology-Oncology of Indiana, P.C. v. Fruits, 2010 WL 3250175 at *2-4 (Ind. Ct. App. Aug. 18, 2010), and Judge Patricia Riley’s dissent in McCabe v. Comm’r, Ind. Dep’t of Ins., 930 N.E.2d 1202 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), trans. sought. In that case, she noted that Butler v. Ind. Dep’t of Ins., 904 N.E.2d 198, 202 (Ind. 2009), reiterated that the Adult Wrongful Death Statute does allow for the recovery of damages other than those spelled out in subsections (c)(3)(A) and (c)(3)(B).

“The AWDS must be narrowly construed, but the legislature used open-ended language to describe the damages available under the statute. Decisions discussing the history and purpose of wrongful death actions, such as Kuba, have indicated that the damages should be compensatory in nature. Therefore, treble and punitive damages have been disallowed. Durham, 745 N.E.2d at 761; Kuba, 508 N.E.2d at 2,” Judge Crone wrote. “By contrast, attorney fees, probate administration costs, and litigation costs are compensatory damages that remedy actual pecuniary losses. Therefore, we find no compelling reason why these damages should not be allowed.”

The fund had argued that pecuniary damages are “categorically unavailable” under the AWDS.

“We cannot agree. Loss of services, when proved, would constitute a pecuniary loss of the type contemplated by the AWDS. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court,” Judge Crone wrote.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT