Home » Blog

Blog

Update on Indiana Eminent Domain Law: Duke Energy, LLC v. Bellwether Properties, LLC

October 14, 2022 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

Bellwether Properties, LLC, (“Bellwether”) owned property encumbered by a 10’ utility easement owned by Duke Energy, Indiana (“Duke”). Duke owned a transmission power line that ran through the property centered within the easement area. Bellwether wanted to build a warehouse on its property abutting the easement. Duke informed them that the electrical safety code would not allow Bellwether to build within 12.5 feet of the power line, some of which was outside of the 10’ Duke easement. Bellwether sued Duke for inverse condemnation, claiming that Duke had taken part of its land without compensation by disallowing Bellwether to utilize the property abutting the easement for the warehouse.

The parties disagreed whether Bellwether’s claim was an issue of a physical taking or a regulatory taking. A physical taking is one where the government acquires the private property for a public purpose as opposed to a regulatory taking where the government’s regulation of the property is so onerous that it in effect has taken the property. The court recognized two categories of regulatory action that are deemed regulatory takings: (1) where government requires an owner to suffer a permanent physical invasion of her property and (2) regulations that completely deprive an owner of all economically beneficial use of their property.

The Court treated the claim as a regulatory taking and examined the case under the lens of Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City and weighed the factors created by the US Supreme Court for regulatory takings – (1) the economic impact of the regulation on the property owner, (2) the character of the governmental action and (3) if there was a physical invasion as opposed to a public program adjusting the benefits and burdens to the property owner to promote the common good. Using the Penn Central factors, the court determined that the economic impact to the Bellwether property was minimal. The warehouse to be built had to be resized by only 150 square feet and it reduced the number of storage racks in the building from thirty to twenty-nine. The court also found that the electrical code clearance standard had already been in the Indiana Administrative Code when Bellwether purchased the property and property owners are charged with knowledge of the laws that affect their property. Further, the clearance was intended to protect lives and property from being too close to electric transmission lines, which is applied across the board, not just to the Bellwether property.

Because Bellwether did not meet the standard set forth in Penn Central, the court ultimately found that the prohibition of building the warehouse, even outside the easement area, was not a compensable taking by Duke. The decision in Duke Energy, Indiana, LLC v. Bellwether Properties, LLC affirms a condemnor’s rights within right of way easements and should serve as a caveat to landowners to carefully consider easements when considering current and future property improvements. I have practiced eminent domain condemnation law for over a decade and accept case referrals from attorneys across Indiana and represent commercial, agricultural and residential landowners to assert their rights and maximize compensation in land acquisition transactions.

Article by: Lindsey M. Bennett, attorney

5G Is Coming, What Are Your Rights?

September 13, 2022 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

Could you come home one day to discover that a 5G tower is being built in your front yard?

For a group of Indianapolis homeowners, the answer was “yes.”

Local media reported this summer that some Indiana homeowners had come home to find a 5G tower being built essentially in their front yards. One homeowner expressed shock as they had no notice that a large pole would be placed in the right of way of their front yard. As they investigated the matter, they quickly discovered that they had no recourse to have it removed.

What is 5G?

5G refers to fifth generation mobile network and is supposed to deliver faster more reliable data speeds. This means that you will be able to, for example, download a movie faster without buffering, join a zoom call so you can work remotely and program your smart refrigerator from your smart phone. 5G and Wi-Fi currently coexist but 5G can be used as an alternative, if its available. The main 5G disadvantages are that it is offered in limited areas, it requires several towers where it is available and some believe that it can cause cancer. 5G is made possible by wireless antennas and other equipment called “small cell facilities”. The small cell facilities supplement cellular networks and facilitate the 5G deployment; they require a support structure and a single pole in most cases called a “tower” to transmit signals properly. You might see them attached to a utility pole or the 5G company may construct a new pole to support the small cell facility. Towers can reach up to fifty feet (50’) tall.

Where are 5G towers allowed?

The federal government allows telecommunication providers to place their 5G towers in rights of way or other city-owned property. Rights of way are generally found along roads, whether on main streets or in neighborhoods. The right of way area of a neighborhood is usually found between the curb and the sidewalk of each property.

Who regulates 5G?

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates the telecommunications industry. Federal law gives 5G companies discretion to place their poles where they see fit to implement 5G. Many people get upset at their local government for allowing placement of the 5G towers in their neighborhoods, but in Indiana, local governments are prohibited from regulating most aspects of 5G towers and cannot prohibit the 5G tower from being placed in the right of way.

Local governments have limited, control of 5G towers. Municipalities may require a permit for (1) the construction of new support structures, (2) substantial modification of a support structure, (3) collocation of wireless facilities on an existing structure and (4) construction, placement and use of small cell facilities. If the municipality has an existing ordinance which restricts its right of way for underground or buried utilities in residential areas, a communications provider may be required to apply for a waiver and send notice to a neighborhood association that a new pole is to be placed in their neighborhood. The neighborhood and the municipality can work together to have a say in the preferred location of the new poles and what the pole should look like.

How can you protect your property?

Check your property and see where the right of way is located. Check with your local government and ensure that they have passed the required ordinances. Sign your neighborhood up for notifications with your local government. Stay involved in the process if you receive notification and communicate regularly with your elected officials.

The Federal Communication Commission has stated that “supporting the deployment of 5G and other next-generation wireless services through smart infrastructure policy is critical” and that they are “committed to doing (their) part to help ensure the United States wins the global race to 5G to the benefit of all Americans”. Indiana 5G Zone recently announced their intent to launch a $2 million grant program to accelerate 5G related projects around the state. 5G isn’t going anywhere and the federal government is making rules and enacting laws that ensure it will continue to grow. Make sure you know your rights.

The government and public utilities do have certain rights related to the right of way easements of private property. However, if the government or public utility requires a portion, or all your land in addition to the right of way easement for a public project that is when you need an eminent domain attorney. I have over a decade of experience in eminent domain law and help landowners protect their rights and maximize compensation in land acquisition transactions. There is no cost for a case evaluation. Contact me to learn more.

Article by: Lindsey M. Bennett, attorney

FBI Investigates Sexual Abuse Claims Within New Orleans Catholic Church

July 11, 2022 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

By: Shaunestte Terrell, Attorney

News of a federal investigation into sexual abuse claims within the Catholic Church in New Orleans has gained national attention. And while this type of news isn’t as surprising as it once was, the nature of this investigation and the possible legal claim is.

Reports of alleged sexual abuse within the Roman Catholic Diocese of New Orleans involve priests who allegedly abused children during trips to camps and amusement parks in Mississippi, Texas and Florida. Sexual abuse claims that involve travel across state lines fall under the scope of the Mann Act, an anti-sex trafficking law. And while some of the reports about New Orleans priests involved alleged abuse that happened decades ago, there is no statute of limitations for violations of the Mann Act. This means that adults who were allegedly molested as children are able to bring a claim against these predator priests and the church under the Mann Act.

Mann Act and Justice For Sexual Abuse Survivors

The application of the Mann Act is important as the average age for disclosure of sexual abuse is 52, well after the abuse occurred. Many sexual abuse claims are barred by state laws that contain time limits on how long a victim has to file a lawsuit, aka statute of limitations. For instance, in Indiana a victim of sexual abuse generally has until the age of 25 to file a lawsuit if they were sexually abused as a minor. That means if they wait until they are 52, which is the average age of disclosure, it will be too late for them to take legal action in Indiana. Of course, there are some exceptions. It is important for anyone who has suffered sexual abuse to speak with an attorney experienced with sexual abuse lawsuits who can advise them of their legal rights and options.

It takes courage for survivors to report sexual abuse. There are a variety of factors that influence when, or even if, a survivor will disclose the abuse they suffered. Sexual abuse perpetrated by priests, religious leaders and faith community volunteers can inflict a deep sense of shame and guilt. Victims are often left to struggle with sexual abuse trauma as well as conflicts with their religious beliefs. Our sexual abuse litigation team at Cohen & Malad, LLP has represented people who suffered sexual abuse within faith communities and can help you.

Sexual Abuse Crisis in Faith Communities

The Catholic Church has certainly garnered the most attention for its history of failing victims of sexual abuse. Investigators found church leaders covered up reports of abuse for decades and allowed perpetrator priests to relocate to other diocese where they often continued to prey on children. But this problem isn’t unique to the Catholic Church. If fact, the Southern Baptist Convention was recently the subject of a investigation by Texas journalists who exposed decades of sexual abuse reports within the church that SBC leaders ignored or mishandled. After the media broke the story, SBC leaders hired Guidepost Solutions to conduct an independent investigation into reports of sexual abuse within the church. A 259-page report was published in May 2022 which included a number of findings regarding the mishandling of sexual abuse claims and allegations of mistreatment of sexual abuse victims by Executive Committee members which spanned 20 years.

Across social media the #ChurchToo movement has helped sexual abuse survivors find their voice. Our attorneys have represented survivors in civil court for over 20 years and have fought to get compensation for sexual abuse survivors so they can pay for mental health services and other resources to heal from the trauma of sexual abuse. If you have been sexually abused by a priest, pastor, faith leader or anyone within a religious community we believe you and stand ready to help you. You are not alone. Contact us now.

Sexual Assault: How the Burden of Proof in a Criminal Prosecution Can Affect a Civil Lawsuit

July 22, 2021 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

By: Amina A. Thomas, Attorney

The New York Times’ Monday morning headline this week was a report on How Rape Cases Get Dropped. The article examines why, even amidst increased social and cultural awareness in recent years surrounding sexual assault, prosecutors often still refuse to bring criminal prosecutions of sexual assault and frequently drop cases after they do bring charges. The report states:

“The Me Too movement led to heightened awareness of the prevalence of sexual assault, an increase in reports to police, and a new hope that people accused would be more frequently held accountable. But in New York City, statistics and the accounts of women who say they were attacked suggest that little has changed about the way the criminal justice system grapples with rape accusations.”

As mentioned in the report, a major reason rape and sexual assault cases are so often rejected by prosecutors is because of the high burden of proof that prosecutors must meet, coupled with the fact that sexual assault cases often present inherent challenges of witness credibility. Usually, there isn’t a third-party witness to these crimes, and as the report notes, in cases where “the attacker is not a stranger and alcohol is involved,” it can be extremely difficult to convince a jury of the defendant’s guilt.

The burden of proof in civil litigation, however, is lower than that in a criminal prosecution. Instead of proving his or her case “beyond a reasonable doubt,” a rape or sexual assault survivor plaintiff most only convince a jury by a “preponderance of the evidence.” In other words, the plaintiff must only be able to show that, more likely than not, the assault occurred.

While this lower evidentiary standard is, at first blush, helpful to survivor-plaintiffs, the aftermath of a criminal prosecution usually has a strong effect on the outcome of a civil lawsuit. Almost all the evidence set forth in a criminal prosecution against a perpetrator will become relevant in a civil action against that same perpetrator. When a prosecutor secures a guilty plea or conviction against a perpetrator, the survivor’s civil case is inherently much stronger.

On the other hand, if a criminal case is dropped or a jury finds a perpetrator not guilty, a survivor who wishes to pursue a civil lawsuit against his or her perpetrator will be left with an extremely onerous battle of combating the negatively skewed evidence from the criminal proceedings. Furthermore, a negative result in a criminal case is emotionally draining for a survivor, and in turn can often make survivors hesitant to move forward with civil action at all.

Cohen & Malad, LLP’s clients who are survivors of sexual assault are usually also taking part in a criminal prosecution against their perpetrators. In the unfortunate circumstance that a prosecutor believes he or she is unable to prove a rape or sexual assault charge, the decision to pursue a different or lesser charge, such as “battery,” is often still more helpful to a subsequent civil case than a prosecutor bringing no case at all or pursuing a charge on which a jury is unlikely to convict.

Prosecutors should continue to encourage survivors of sexual assault to come forward against their abusers. One way to encourage survivors is by exploring alternative courses of action that enable prosecutors to see these cases through. At the end of the day, a finding of guilt on a lesser charge such as battery, is still an acknowledgement by the perpetrator and by society that the accused act did in fact occur. It will result in at least some level of accountability for the perpetrator and creates more positive evidence for a survivor to build a civil case against their perpetrator. Most importantly, a conviction or guilty plea—even of a less serious offense— can provide recognition to the survivor that his or her courage to come forward was not for nothing.

Sexual Abuse in Indiana Schools

April 2, 2021 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

VIDEO: A discussion with attorney Shaunestte Terrell

Talk with Shaunestte

Learn more about how Cohen & Malad, LLP’s sexual abuse litigation attorneys can help you here.

Transcription:

Hi, I’m Shaunestte Terrell. I’m an attorney on Cohen & Malad, LLP’s sexual abuse litigation team. And today I’m joined by Jaime Lira, our firm’s marketing and communications director. And we’re going to have a conversation about the problem of sexual abuse perpetrated by teachers in Indiana schools. In addition to representing sexual abuse survivors in civil litigation. I also host Cohen & Malad’s Support for Survivors podcast, which Jaime produces. And we talk about a variety of topics and interview guests to share their expertise and offer resources to help survivors get justice and healing. So I’d like to invite anyone watching this video to check out our podcasts. It is available on almost every podcast platform, and I think you could really get something out of it.

Shaunestte, we do cover so many interesting topics on the Support for Survivors podcast. And I thought it would be interesting to offer this larger conversation about sexual abuse in Indiana schools in a slightly different way and share it on the firm blog. So thank you for being flexible. Of course. So the media recently reported about a case filed against North central high school drama teacher. Nathan Shewell. Shewell was accused of abuse by several former students. Some claim that the abuse was sexual in nature while others mentioned verbal and physical abuse, RTV six reporter, Kara Kenney talked with roughly a dozen former students about their experience with the teacher. And she also interviewed you, Shaunestte. So what do you think is important for students and parents to know when it comes to issues of sexual misconduct?

Well, Jaime first and foremost, that is prolific. I think that people think that, you know, it can’t happen to me. It can happen to my kid, but it can, this is happening every day in schools, across the country. And certainly in schools within Indiana, it can happen to your child no matter what you think. It truly, we’ve had tons of parents who were just shocked and sad and obviously, and you know, that’s what we’re here for. But first and foremost, upon finding out that your child or another child has been abused, you have to call the police. The biggest issue at that point is the safety of your child and the safety of other children. Because as long as that teacher continues to be in that school, all those kids are at risk and we all have to work together to bring perpetrators into the light.

So they don’t have the opportunity to harm another child because as long as they stay in those classrooms and people don’t say anything, then they do and, you also have to look down the road. And that’s what we do at Cohen & Malad, LLP because oftentimes survivors of sexual abuse, and sometimes those who have been abused by a person in a position of authority, like a teacher, they suffer serious. Long-term ramifications as a result of the abuse and oftentimes ongoing mental health treatment is needed. That’s really expensive. And who does that burden typically fall on the parents or the survivor themselves as they get older. And that’s ridiculous. They shouldn’t have to have that ongoing costs for possibly the rest of their lives because this other person did this to them. And so we believe that the perpetrator and any negligent party who have some culpability in putting that child in harm’s way, they should pay for that.

And beyond that companies and organizations have to be held accountable. And I’ve said it a thousand times and I’m going to keep saying it until things change. I would love to be able to sit here and say that people will do the right thing because it’s the right thing to do, but it’s just not true. And we see it every day and we work to hold those schools accountable, and you know, other organizations too, it’s not just schools, churches, sports organizations, companies, you name it. We’ve probably seen it. And unfortunately the hard truth is holding them accountable is typically by going after their pocketbook. Because again, most of them just aren’t doing what they should be doing. And so in trying to hold those schools accountable in pursuing civil litigation against them, we have to abide by these arbitrary deadlines. I think most people have heard the term statute of limitations.

So they don’t really know what it means, but what it boils down to is there are deadlines in which we have to file things with court. Otherwise you are banned permanently from being able to civilly sue any of these organizations. It’s absolutely ridiculous. The deadlines are arbitrary. And you know, when most people find out that their kid has been abused, they’re not thinking about suing anyone rightfully so, why would you be? They simply want to hold that person accountable. And they want to make sure that their kid gets justice. But part of that justice is looking down the road and to be able to do that, we have to get some of these legal filings done in a really short period of time. And when we’re unable to help someone because of that statute of limitations, I think the kids are being victimized in another way, and it causes further damage because they’re just being, let down again.

And you know, the school has very serious responsibilities. First and foremost, you keep kids safe, period. That is what you have to do. And unfortunately as evidence in some of these discussions that we’re having here today, many schools failed to do that. They’re required 100% of the time to report any suspicion of abuse. Not I saw it happen it’s suspicion and if they do not do so. It’s not just, they look bad. They are subject to criminal prosecution. Yeah, it’s a crime. In fact, it’s not even just people within schools. It’s every adult in Indiana is what we call a mandatory reporter. That means again, if you even suspect child abuse, you are required to report that to the police. You do not have to directly witness it. If you hear concerning neighbor or concerning noises from your neighbors house, call it in. And if you don’t, you too are subject to being prosecuted, criminally.

And I have seen multiple school officials being charged for crimes because they failed to do so. And I think that that is an important point because we trust that our kids are going to be safe when they go to school. And when that doesn’t happen and they should have been, then they need to be held accountable. And the reason that law is so strict is first of all, as we said, child safety for this child, but it is proven that if we bring those perpetrators out into the light, then we can stop the abuse. There is no more further abuse because they cannot have access to children anymore. And again, that’s why we do what we do. We see over and over almost a daily basis schools that don’t report. I think oftentimes they think that keeping it quiet and trying to handle things internally is going to help protect the integrity of the organization. And that simply isn’t true. It’s the opposite, actually. These secrets will come to light and when they do, they will suffer much more damage than they would have if they’d done the right thing in the first place. And more importantly, fewer kids will be abused if they just report the abuse.

So I don’t think that what happened at North central is really unique. Is it?

Oh, no, definitely not. In many cases, we hear it as like an open secret that a certain teacher had sexual relations with students, but no one said anything and that’s illegal. That goes again, it goes back to that what we’re talking about with the mandatory reporting, and it’s not, it’s not unique. This happens all the time. Just since the beginning of this year, three Indiana school districts have been named in sexual abuse reports and it’s March. Two of those were here within Indianapolis, Nathan Shewell up at North Central and Tyler Carmichael at Speedway. And both of whom were known for these types of behaviors for years and no one called the police. Then the third one is actually a superintendent up in Northern Indiana, a superintendent. So it’s not just the teachers. I mean, that’s going to the top of the school corporation right there.

It’s shocking because you know, I did a little bit of research before we decided to have this conversation today and I found that across the state of Indiana. So this, this is our state. I found eight other reports of sexual abuse in 2020. So Shaunestte, why do you think that there’s more sexual abuse happening?

I don’t necessarily think that it’s happening more. I think that the MeToo movement has helped bring the conversation forward and taken away some of that shame that is often associated with sexual abuse. I think that we are experiencing a cultural shift finally, where people feel more empowered to come forward. But, you know, I want to make something clear. I’ve been prosecuting these crimes for a long time before we were doing this kind of work. And I want all survivors to understand you should never feel ashamed or embarrassed if you’ve been molested or sexually assaulted. Even if at the time, you know, you were a teenager and you thought that you were consenting to it, you, you were a child, it is not your fault. You didn’t ask for it. You didn’t deserve what happened to you. And again, I think that we do have a cultural shift happening, but we still have a long way to go. And, you know, part of what we do is trying to help people feel that empowerment to come forward and know that there’s somebody here on this side, who’s going to help them every step of the way, because it is a difficult process.

I think that’s a really good point. And, you know, like back to that larger issue about sexual abuse in schools, I found an interesting study called Educator Sexual Abuse, and it was conducted by Carol Shakeshaft. And she’s a professor at the Virginia Commonwealth University and she made several interesting points about Educator Sexual Abuse. And so one of the things that she said is that sexual abuse happens in all grades. And that 38% of reported adult abusers targeted elementary school students, which is a little surprising.56% actually abused middle or high school students, which I think is more of kind of like what we’re thinking. Then yet there was still 6% that actually abused students that were throughout kindergarten through 12th. So I found that really interesting. Her study went a little deeper and she actually found 225 cases of Educator Sexual Abuse in New York schools.

And none of those abusers were actually reported to authorities. And only 1% actually even lost their license to teach, which is surprising. And then part of that same study of all of the accused, all of them admitted to physical sexual abuse of a student. But then only 35% of them actually suffered negative consequences. And when she said negative consequences, she was talking about either getting fired, having a formal reprimand or a suspension from the school. And then 25% of those offenders received no consequences at all. Or they just had like an informal conversation like, “Hey, you should probably stop doing that”. And that I found really shocking. I mean, this was a study of Educator Sexual Abuse, and this is what they found. And that many of the people actually just chose to leave the school district and they kept their retirement packages and positive recommendations intact.

So they just moved on to the next school to do whatever it was that they were going to do. Just really surprising findings in this report that she put together. And she said, you know, even more shockingly was a recent report on sexual abuse in New York City. And what she analyzed was that 60% of the employees who were accused of sexual abuse were allowed to stay in that environment and that they were just transferred to desk jobs inside of the schools instead of directly being in front of the kids and teaching them. So I think that Shakeshaft’s study shows that really until recently the schools haven’t done a whole heck of a lot to prevent sexual abuse that was happening. She actually points to more recent things like lawsuit settlements, newspaper, and media coverage that has really started to shine a light on Educator Sexual Abuse and make schools want to do something about it. But that it’s still just not really high on the priority list for schools. So given all of that, Shaunestte, what do you think Indiana schools need to do to ensure the safety of our students and what do parents need to know and what do they need to do if their child reports that they’ve been sexually abused?

Well at schools, it’s very simple. It’s their number one priority here should be safety and ensuring the safety of those kids. They need to make sure they have got the proper protocols in place in terms of whether or not, and how to prevent it. And also going forward when someone does report or someone suspects, something, they should have very clear hiring and retention guidelines. You mentioned that in that study well, that’s exactly what happened with Nathan Shewell. He was dismissed from two other school districts in the past, but no one reported anything. So the next school, maybe didn’t know, and that’s how it continues to happen. So you need to have all these different protocols in place to make sure that they know when someone has those previous allegations. And so that the next school knows. So that there isn’t a next school and they need to report. The takeaway here at the end of the day for everyone is simple.

If you see something, you say something sounds easy because it should be not only is it the right thing to do for this child, you will protect children down the line. Likely not the abuser’s first rodeo, and they will continue to perpetrate abuse upon children until someone makes them stop. And if your child has been abused, call us, we can help you. You got to remember that those arbitrary statutes of limitations that we talked about a little bit more, they’re even more limited deadlines when it comes to school litigation and it’s all lawyer stuff, but it is really, really strict. And if we don’t get things done on time, then nobody will ever be able to help you. We can help you. We want to help you.

Sexual Assault Statutes of Limitations: Archaic, Arbitrary, Absurd Deadlines

March 2, 2021 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

By: Shaunestte Terrell, Attorney

Anyone who’s ever taken in an episode of Law & Order (or even Night Court back in the day) has heard that strange term: Statute of Limitations, or SOL as we attorneys frequently refer to it. It seems like its meaning should be self-explanatory, but is it? In some ways, yes, but it is also extremely complex and convoluted. And, unfortunately, that matters.

Recently, WRTV reporter, Kara Kenney, conducted an in-depth, exceptional investigation into the absurdity of Indiana’s statutes of limitations (SOLs) as they relate to sexual abuse and assault. What she uncovered is the single biggest impediment to helping sexual abuse survivors. In Kara’s report, the absurdity of Indiana’s SOLs has finally taken center stage. At Cohen & Malad, LLP we face this challenge with survivors every day.

Childhood sexual abuse is pervasive throughout our society and affects a large percentage of both boys and girls. If a survivor of childhood sexual abuse decides at some point that they want to pursue civil litigation, they only have until seven years after reaching adulthood to file suit. Loosely, that will typically mean until the individual’s twenty-fifth birthday. If the lawsuit has not been filed by that date, the survivor is forever barred from filing suit. On its face, that may not seem like such a huge deal. However, the average age of disclosure for a person who was sexually abused as a child is 52 years old. That is more than double the years of life that person has lived when their statute expires. This is extremely alarming. Usually, at the time of a survivor’s twenty-fifth birthday, they have not yet fully realized the effect of the abuse on his/her life. Sexual abuse is not like a car accident. The survivor may not be fully aware of the misdeed, let alone the severe impact upon them for decades.

Real-life impact for sexual abuse survivors

It gets worse. If this is a person who was abused by someone at school (e.g., teacher, coach, etc.), there is an additional legal requirement. The survivor must file a technical, Tort Claim Notice within 180 days after their eighteenth birthday to give notice to the school that civil litigation against them may be pursued at some point. If that notice is not sent to the school within that time, the survivor is forever barred from holding accountable any school entity that was negligent in their hiring or retention practices. It is difficult to understand the rationale behind this deadline since it imposes a heavy burden on survivors while allowing perpetrators and their enablers to avoid responsibility and walk away scot-free.

Let’s look at this in a real-life, ongoing scenario. A local high school teacher was recently arrested for Child Seduction and Sexual Battery after assaulting a seventeen-year-old student. As is common, dozens of others have come forward since the perpetrator’s arrest to disclose repeated instances of sexual misconduct and assault at the hands of this teacher. Sadly, most of these cases are long past the expiration of the SOL.

One of these young women is now twenty-one years old. She was assaulted by this teacher when she was fourteen. At first, we were extremely optimistic that our Cohen & Malad, LLP team might be able to help this girl. But, sadly, we cannot. Why? Like almost all Hoosiers. she and her parents had never heard of the requirement to send a Tort Claim Notice so they didn’t do it. And why would they know of this obscure, arbitrary rule? Most attorneys aren’t even aware of this requirement, let alone a non-lawyer eighteen-year-old girl.

Survivors of sexual abuse deserve access to justice

Because this situation occurs so frequently among the survivors we meet with, we have joined with survivor groups, like Legislative Reform for Indiana’s Survivors (LRIS), to support efforts in the legislature to reform these archaic deadlines for the last several years. Unfortunately, our Indiana legislature has killed the bill, never even allowing it to have a hearing, despite the fact that such a bill has passed overwhelmingly in almost every other state where their legislature has voted on it. It seems nonsensical that Indiana legislators wouldn’t want to help protect children from sexual abuse and to help hold accountable perpetrators and enablers of days past. But that is the sad reality we face. The bill has already been killed for the 2021 legislative session as the Chairwoman of the Judiciary Committee refused to even grant it a hearing. Maybe next year, Senator Brown???

5 Reasons You Should Consider a Premarital Agreement

September 9, 2020 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

By: Nicole Makris, Attorney

When marriage is on the horizon, the discussion of a premarital agreement can be an important step in planning for the future. Some people are hesitant about discussing a premarital agreement with their significant other because they fear it appears to be “planning for divorce.” This outlook overlooks the numerous benefits to a premarital agreement. Similar to an insurance policy, the premarital agreement is only there if you need it someday. Here are five reasons to consider when deciding if a premarital agreement is right for you.

Premarital agreements can be personalized.

You can design your premarital agreement to meet your specific needs. Some couples only wish to distinguish their personal property owned prior to the marriage as separate property so that the rest of the property acquired during the marriage would be considered marital property in the event of divorce. Premarital agreements can be limited in scope to protect specific assets, such as inheritances or residences, or to designate responsibility for specific debts, such as student loans.

Premarital agreements promote financial disclosure.

The process of entering into a premarital agreement helps promote transparency as to each party’s assets and debts. The sharing of financial standings with one another before marriage can help promote openness in dialogue surrounding financial matters during the marriage.

Premarital agreements are not only for people who have significant assets at the time of the marriage.

Indiana law considers all property of the parties to a marriage to be marital property subject to division. A premarital agreement can be especially important for individuals who have significant assets that he or she will be bringing into the marriage. Through a premarital agreement, these assets can be classified as that individual’s separate property if a divorce occurs. When an individual has interests in a family business, a premarital agreement can designate the business interests as that person’s non-marital property. However, premarital agreements are not only for people who have significant assets at the time of the marriage. Even if neither party has personal property of value at the time of the marriage, a premarital agreement can plan for the division of future assets that the couple acquires throughout the marriage, such as retirement accounts.

Premarital agreements can simplify property division in the event of divorce.

Premarital agreements can be extremely valuable in the event of divorce by outlining each spouse’s property rights, from real estate to bank accounts. Premarital agreements also allocate responsibility for debts of the couple, such as credit cards and vehicle loans. Having an agreement on these issues before marriage can minimize the number of issues that the couple must determine if a spouse later files for divorce.

Premarital agreements may be modified.

You and your spouse can decide to make changes to your premarital agreement during the marriage. Any modification will need to be in accordance with the terms of the original premarital agreement. Couples may choose to modify a premarital agreement when new significant assets or debts have been acquired or if they agree upon a new division of property in the event of dissolution of the marriage.

Premarital agreements can provide clarity to couples on property issues and simplify the division of property if divorce occurs in the future. I have helped many clients over the years with premarital agreements. If you are considering a premarital agreement or have additional questions, please contact me for a consultation.

The Effect of Covid-19 on Business Contracts

May 5, 2020 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

By: Arend J. Abel, Attorney

With much of the nation shut down during the Covid-19 pandemic, many business contracts may not be performed. One of the questions that arises from that circumstance is whether non-performance will be considered a breach of contract, subjecting the non-performing party to an action for damages. There are three areas to consider in analyzing that question: 1) Force Majeure; 2) Impossibilitiy; and 3) Impracticability. Impracticability is confined to contracts for the sale of goods governed by the Uniform Commercial Code

Force Majeure

Force Majeure, a French term meaning “superior force,” is a doctrine that excuses contractual performance made impossible by events listed in a contractual force majeure clause. As the Indiana Court of Appeals has observed “the scope and effect of a force majeure clause depends on the specific contract language, and not on any traditional definition of the term. Specialty Foods of Indiana, Inc. v. City of South Bend, 997 N.E.2d 23, 27 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). A typical force majeure clause may look something like the following:

If a party cannot perform the obligations of this agreement due to an act of God, legal prohibition, fire, flood, natural disasters, military operations, or any other circumstance not within the control of the party, then the party is excused from performing such obligations.

The key question to ask in considering whether a force majeure clause excused a party’s performance is whether the event causing the non-performance is one of the events listed in the clause. If the language does not specifically include diseases or epidemics, a court may or may not find that general language describing “other circumstances not within the control of the party” covers the event. The Court of Appeals decision in Specialty Foods suggests that the particular clause set out above would cover such an event. However, even slight changes in language can affect the result. For example, a clause that excuse a party from performing for “reasons outside the party’s control such as an act of God, legal prohibition, fire, flood, natural disasters or military operations” might not cover CoVid-19 because the “such as” language might be interpreted to require the unlisted events to be similar in kind to those listed. See Kel Kim Corp. v. Central Markets, Inc., 70 N.Y.2d 900, 902, 519 N.E.2d 295, 296 n.* (1987) (language that “other similar causes beyond the control of such party” did not cover an inability to perform due to an inability to obtain insurance coverage).

Impossibility

Under Indiana law, as well as the law of most States, impossibility of performance excuses contractual performance, even in the absence of a force majeure clause. Wagler v. West Boggs Sewer District, 980 N.E.2d 363, 378 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). However, the party claiming the defense must show that performance is “not merely difficult or relatively impossible, but absolutely impossible, owing to the act of God, the act of the law, or the loss or destruction of the subject-matter of the contract.” Id. (quoting Ross Clinic, Inc. v. Tabion, 419 N.E.2d 219, 223 (Ind.Ct.App.1981), which in turn quoted Krause v. Bd. of Trustees of Sch. Town of Crothersville, 162 Ind. 278, 283–284, 70 N.E. 264, 265 (1904)).

This may be difficult to meet in the case of Covid-19, though perhaps a business ordered to close by the authorities could meet the requirements, depending on the specific contract involved.

The Indiana Court of Appeals has considered whether an epidemic excuses contractual performance on two occasions. Gregg School Township v. Hinshaw, 76 Ind. App. 503, 132 N.E. 586, 587 (1921); Gear v. Gray, 10 Ind. App. 428, 37 N.E. 1059 (1894). In Gregg, the Court held that the fact that a school was ordered closed due to the 1918 flu pandemic meant that the School board did not have to pay teachers during the time the school was closed. In Gear, the Court reached the opposite conclusion when a school was closed due to a local diptheria epidemic. Explaining the different results, the Court in Gregg noted that in Gear, the local health authorities who ordered the school closed did not have express statutory authority to close the schools. In Gregg, the Court noted, there was such authority, and the contract had to be read as incorporating such authority, which rendered performance of the contract impossible.

It is unclear how Gregg will affect contracts of businesses that have been shut down in the latest pandemic. If the contract is one that literally cannot be performed when the business is shut down (such as a contract for an entertainer to appear at a venue), then most likely a court would excuse performance on grounds of impossibility. However, contracts by which a business purchases goods and services may be technically possible to perform, even if pointless. Courts may hold that performance is not excused in such cases.

Impracticability

Where contracts are for the sale of goods, the impracticability provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code could come into play. Section 2-615(a) of the U.C.C. provides:

Delay in delivery or non-delivery in whole or in part by a seller who complies with paragraphs (b) and (c) is not a breach of his duty under a contract for sale if performance as agreed has been made impracticable by the occurrence of a contingency the non-occurrence of which was a basic assumption on which the contract was made or by compliance in good faith with any applicable foreign or domestic governmental regulation or order whether or not it later proves to be invalid.

Significantly, the provision excuses a failure to deliver goods by a seller but offers no relief to buyers. In addition, to be excused from performance, the seller must comply with paragraphs (b) and (c) of the statute. If the situation only partially affects the seller’s ability to deliver goods, paragraph (b) requires the seller to allocate production and deliveries among customers in a manner that is “fair and reasonable.” Paragraph (c) requires the seller to provide the buyer with notice that there will be a non-delivery or delay, and if an allocation is required under paragraph (b) what the buyer’s allocation will be.

Impracticability is a lesser standard than impossibility, so sellers may have the ability to avoid contracts that become burdensome to perform, though not strictly impossible.

Regardless of whether Force Majeure, impossibility, or impracticability is invoked, the result will depend on particular facts and circumstances affecting contract performance. The issues will also likely depend on contractual language that covers, or can be read to cover, the specific events in question. I have represented businesses in a variety of litigation for over 30 years. If you are in a contract dispute as a result of this pandemic, contact me to discuss how I can help your business and protect your rights.

Will Your Business Also Survive COVID 19?

April 16, 2020 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

By: George W. Hopper, Attorney

The well-being of you and your family are of utmost concern during this pandemic. What about the well-being of your business? All businesses, large and small are navigating through the current economic downturn and its unique challenges.

Over the past 38 years, I have been advising business clients through five economic recessions. Each recession had certain similarities, but each was also unique in cause, effect and length. Nevertheless, during each recession, the business clients that survived and ultimately prospered each made the same crucial decisions in common:

Each client chose to be proactive rather than reactive in confronting economic and legal challenges to their businesses before they exhausted their financial resources; and
Each client engaged competent legal counsel and financial advisors sooner rather than later in the process.

Of course, it is without question extremely challenging to successfully manage a business in a good economy. During a recession, the task becomes even more challenging and can easily become overwhelming with the addition of new legal issues, shrinking cash flow and reduced available credit. The situation can change and will change dramatically and quickly during this crisis. For this reason, there will be no substitute for timely and competent legal and financial advice.

Depending on the situation confronting your business, there are a variety of tools that can be employed to find solutions. Early in the process, management can consider and pursue solutions that do not involve a formal legal case or proceeding such as:

Refinancing
Loan restructuring
Turnaround negotiations with affected creditors
Recapitalization
Sale or merger

If circumstances do not lend themselves to any of the forgoing tools, business clients may have to resort to litigation, or chapter 11 bankruptcy or a combination of the two approaches.

The bottom line is the sooner the business client proactively meets the challenges presented by the current economic crisis, the greater number of options will be available to address the client’s needs. In fact, during and as a result of the 2008 great recession, the vast majority of cases that I was involved in were successfully resolved out of court, which saved many thousands of dollars in professional fees and generated a superior outcome for both the struggling business and its creditors. Each one of those cases began and ended as a result of the timely decision by management to engage experienced legal counsel. It does not pay to wait. Contact me to discuss ways I can help you protect your business.

Nursing Homes in Indiana and Across the Country are Overwhelmed by COVID-19

April 13, 2020 by Cohen & Malad, LLP Leave a Comment

By: Amina A. Young, Attorney

On Friday, April 10, 2020, the Indiana State Department of Health (ISDH) Commissioner Kristina Box confirmed that twenty-four residents at Bethany Pointe Health Campus in Anderson, Indiana had passed away. Sixteen of the residents who died had tested positive for COVID-19. The other eight showed similar symptoms. Bethany Pointe, owned by Trilogy Health Services, LLC, is one of many nursing homes across the country facing coronavirus outbreaks.

Health care experts and officials have long stated that the elderly are likely one of the most vulnerable populations to the coronavirus due to compromised immune systems and/or underlying conditions.

On March 21, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued guidance for nursing homes and other long-term care facilities to take steps to assess and improve their preparedness for responding to COVID-19. The CDC noted nursing homes are among the highest at risk of being affected by COVID-19 because of their “congregate nature and the residents served (e.g., older adults often with underlying chronic medical conditions).” In its guidance, the CDC recommended rapid implementation of active screening of residents and health care personnel for fever and respiratory symptoms, restricting all visitation except for certain compassionate care situations, such as end of life situations, and implementing sick leave policies and other occupational health considerations.

The CDC also released a Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Preparedness Checklist for Nursing Homes and other Long-Term Care Settings, which identifies key areas that long-term care facilities should consider in their COVID-19 planning. The CDC’s checklist includes a comprehensive communication plan for facilities to ensure that they are communicating with staff, residents, and their families regarding the status and impact of COVID-19 in the facility.

On its website, Trilogy Health Services declares, in responding to the COVID-19 virus, it is “following guidance from the CDC, CMS, and state officials” and is “taking extra precautions over the coming weeks and months to ensure that [its] campuses remain guarded against the spread of viral infections.”

However, a chief complaint of Bethany Pointe residents’ families is that they aren’t being kept informed on the status of the facility’s overall impact from COVID-19, or with regard to their loved one in particular. Many families of Bethany Pointe residents state they were not even so much as notified when the first known cases were confirmed in the nursing home, and before they knew it or had a chance to respond to the situation, their loved one was showing symptoms of COVID-19.

Residents in nursing homes are members of our community and should be given the same respect and access to resources that the rest of the community has access to during a crisis. Families of nursing home residents should be kept timely informed on the overall status of the facility’s impact to COVID-19, and on their loved one’s health.

If your loved one is residing in a nursing home or long-term care facility, and you are concerned about the facility’s handling of its response to COVID-19, one action you can take is to file a complaint or report an incident to the ISDH. Complaint forms can be found on the Indiana State Department of Health’s website.

COVID-19 presents unchartered territory. This article is not legal advice. To discuss the specific facts of your situation, contact us.