Court Opinion

ID: 9505246
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 20:02:50.771645+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:21.760920
License: Public Domain

SULLIVAN, Justice,
concurring and dissenting. °
I concur in the Court's opinion with respect to the advance payments issue.
*145I respectfully dissent, however, from its holding that Indiana law does not permit recovery of punitive damages from a decedent's estate.
The Court fairly presents both sides of this issue, including conflicting authority from other jurisdictions, and I will not reiterate the analysis here. Suffice it to say that I find the contrary authority cited by the Court allowing recovery to be more persuasive. I only add to the points made by the Court that, first, I give the value of deterrence far greater weight than does the Court and that, second, I think it greatly overstates the harm that would be done to "wholly innocent" heirs if punitive damages were recoverable from an estate. After all, under the Court's holding, the effect on a decedent's heirs would be exactly the same if the decedent paid a punitive damages award on the day preceding his or her death. Whether a guilty person's assets should be subject to an assessment for punitive damages should not turn on the vicissitude of whether the guilty person happens to still be alive at the date of assessment or not.