« Courts - "Are Pennsylvania’s ‘Presentments’ Fair to Defendants?" | Main | Ind. Decisions - "Judge will stay on in Simon estate lawsuit" »

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Ind. Decisions - Two today from Supreme Court

In Indiana Spine Group, PC v. Pilot Travel Centers, LLC, a 7-page, 5-0 opinion, Justice Rucker writes:

In this case we conclude that the Worker’s Compensation Act is silent on the question of the limitation period applicable to a medical provider’s claim seeking payment of outstanding bills for authorized treatment to an employer’s employee. We thus hold that the limitation period contained in the general statute of limitation controls. * * *

ISG contends that because the Act provides no express limitation period governing a provider’s Application to recover pecuniary liability, the general statute of limitation enumerated in Indiana Code section 34-11-1-2 should apply instead. That statute provides in part “A cause of action that . . . is not limited by any other statute[,] must be brought within ten (10) years.” Ind. Code § 34-11-1-2. * * *

Without deciding precisely when the ten-year statute of limitation began running against ISG, we hold that in this instance ISG timely filed its Application before the Board.

Conclusion. Because ISG’s claim is timely under Indiana Code section 34-11-1-2, we conclude that the Board erred by dismissing ISG’s application. We therefore reverse the Board’s decision and remand this cause for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

In D.C. v. State of Indiana, an 11-page, 5-0 opinion, Justice David writes:
At a dispositional hearing, the juvenile court imposed on the delinquent child a determinate commitment of two years at the Department of Correction to be followed by an indeterminate commitment. We hold that the determinate and indeterminate commitment statutes in question are unambiguously mutually exclusive, and thus the trial court could impose only one of the commitments on the delinquent child. We reverse the trial court's dispositional order and remand to the trial court to decide, in its discretion, which type of commitment is appropriate.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on November 17, 2011 01:45 PM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions