Court Opinion

ID: 9737353
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:22:45.477885+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:23:58.337968
License: Public Domain

SHEPARD, Chief Justice,
concurring in result.
While I agree that the pecuniary damage rule is the law of the case in this litigation and that it has been the long-standing interpretation given Ind.Code § 34-1-1-8 by this Court, I do not believe that the separation of powers prohibits the judicial department from altering its view on the meaning of the statute. While there are many reasons why one might decline to cast aside an interpretation adopted long ago, that interpretation is still simply a matter of judi-clal construction. Judges should regard themselves as responsible for rules they have erected.