« Ind. Law- More on: Senate is urged to change annexation law | Main | Ind. Courts - Proposed revision of the Rules for Court-Administered Alcohol and Drug Programs »

Monday, February 19, 2007

Ind. Law - Proposal to alter punitive damages law

Here is the digest to HB 1481, which is now eligible for 2nd reading:

Citations Affected: IC 34-51-3.
Synopsis: Punitive damage awards. Provides that contracted attorney fees and reasonable costs are to be paid out of a punitive damage award. Requires: (1) 75% of the remainder of a punitive damage award to be paid to the person to whom the damages were awarded; and (2) 25% of the remainder of the award to be deposited in the violent crime victims compensation fund. Makes technical corrections. (Current law requires: (1) 25% of a punitive damage award to be paid to the person to whom the damages were awarded; and (2) 75% of the award to be deposited in the violent crime victims compensation fund.) Effective: July 1, 2007.
For background on punitive damages in Indiana, see this May 15, 2004 ILB entry and scroll about half-way down to the section beginning:
And what of Indiana? Indiana's punitive damages allocation statute, IC 34-51-3-6, provides that an award of punitive damages is to be paid to the clerk of the court, who is then to pay 75% to the State's Violent Crime Victims' Compensation Fund and 25% to the plaintiff. This law was enacted in 1998. The law was challenged and upheld by the Indiana Supreme court in the case of Cheatham v. Pohle (5/30/03). Access the Indiana Law Blog coverage of the opinion here.
There is much more in the entry.

Also see this May 20, 2004 ILB entry, which included this quote from an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal:

At least eight states currently take a slice of punitive-damages awards. Most let lawyers eat first. Iowa, for instances, takes 75% after lawyers are paid; Alaska and Missouri take 50%. Only Indiana does what Gov. Schwarzenegger proposes, taking its 75% of punitive-damages awards before the lawyer's cut and putting the money in a fund to compensate victims of violent crimes. Last year, an Indiana woman won $100,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages from her ex-husband after he widely distributed photos of the couple having sex. The state claimed its $75,000. She and her lawyers challenged the constitutionality of the statute. They lost.
For more, see this March 29, 2006 ILB entry, titled "State will take most of couple's $2 million verdict". Read it in conjunction with this entry from the following day, and this entry from Nov. 6, 2006, quoting an editorial from the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette.

Finally, if you have TimesSelect ($$$), take a look at this article by Adam Liptak in today's NY Times, titled "When Lawyers and Juries Mete Out Punishment." A few "select" quotes:

Compensatory damages compensate: they pay for medical expenses, lost wages and “pain and suffering.” They are meant to make the plaintiff whole. Putting a price on Ms. Buell-Wilson’s suffering is impossible, and a jury is as capable as anyone else in trying.

Punitive damages, by contrast, are by definition the extreme case. They are meant to punish and deter defendants who engage in extraordinary wrongdoing. They are similar in purpose to criminal fines, and they can be a windfall to the plaintiffs. * * *

Most countries do not use civil cases to punish wrongdoing. Nor do they entrust juries to make cost-benefit policy judgments about how much safety we want. In the United States, we deputize plaintiffs’ lawyers and juries to supplement government safety regulators and law enforcement officials.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on February 19, 2007 12:36 PM
Posted to Indiana Law