Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A tort reform push was dramatically pared back in the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, leaving behind narrow public nuisance language and a proposed summer study of Indiana’s civil litigation climate.
House Bill 1417, authored by Rep. Matt Lehman, R-Berne, previously cleared the House in a 61-34 vote. But senators adopted two amendments that stripped out provisions dealing with qualified settlement offers and attorney fee awards — and instead created a tort reform task force.
The amended bill advanced to the full Senate in a party-line vote. Several Democrats warned it could still curb tools used by local governments to challenge “bad actors.”
Sen. Rodney Pol, D-Chesterton, said municipalities and school districts are often the first to act “on behalf of their communities” when harm occurs. He cautioned that narrowing public nuisance law could remove “sometimes, often the only recourse that exists for certain communities.”
Examples given included cigarette and opioid settlements.
One of the amendments made clear that limits on public nuisance actions would only apply to governmental entities — not private individuals — and deleted language that would have increased potential attorney fee awards tied to rejected settlement offers. A second change eliminated the bill’s qualified settlement offer provisions altogether and established a summer “tort reform commission to study broader civil litigation issues.
Lehman told senators his goal is to bring “all the stakeholders” together.
“We’re going to sit together around the table, and we’re going to hash this issue out, and everybody’s going to be there, and we’re going to figure this out,” he said.
Although much of the original proposal was negotiated away, Lehman emphasized that lawmakers in recent years have wrestled with third party litigation funding, premises liability, trucking cases and costly discovery for parties “being brought into litigation that really have a very, very far reaching net.”
Supporters, he added, don’t want Indiana “to be reactive when it needs to be proactive,” pointing to civil litigation changes in Georgia, Texas, Florida, for example.
Robert Johnson, president of the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association, said his group supports “data driven responsible reform.” He referenced court data showing “a number of filings” have decreased over the years, and jury verdicts have decreased, too.
Natalie Carroll, state director for the National Federation of Independent Business, said tort reform “is a top priority for small businesses.”
“A lot of firms operate on thin margins. They don’t have the same resources and legal teams available to fight off against frivolous lawsuits or unpredictable lawsuits,” she said. “We welcome the opportunity to be a part of the discussion, and hopefully, if the task force provision moves forward, we hope that the outcome of that results in a better legal climate for the small business community.”
Indiana Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Indiana Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Niki Kelly for questions: [email protected].
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.