Archive for the ‘Wrongful Death’ Category

Faulty Appliances Causing More and More Fires Per New Study by Consumer Reports: More Defective Products in the USA

February 2nd, 2012 by admin

Consumer Reports has just issued the results of its investigation into the safety of commonly used appliances and the news isn’t good: according to Consumer Reports, appliances can start fires just setting there — they may not even be operating when the fire starts — and the cause of the fires all too often are not mistakes made by humans (which the manufacturer is always quick to suggest) but because of a product defect.

Consumer Reports did its usual research including culling through lots of fire data compiled by the federal government, and has found that it’s a 50-50% chance that the defect in the product starts the fire.  Not the human.

Scary stuff here: appliances that turn themselves on.  Fires popping up from flaws in dishwashers. You can read all the details about the study online in the March 2012 issue of Consumer Reports magazine.

8 Things You Can Do To Protect Against Appliance Fires

Meanwhile, Consumer Reports has issued a press release to warn all of us about the real danger of appliance fires and to give 8 tips for protecting against an appliance fire:

  1. Register new appliances. The large number of recalls is a sobering reminder of how important it is for consumers to register their products with manufacturers in order to be promptly notified in the event of a recall. Consumers concerned about their privacy or junk mail need only provide manufacturers with their name, contact information and the appliance’s model number.
  2. Check for recalls. Consumers can sign up for alerts at www.recalls.gov. Those who move into a home with existing appliances should record their make and model and check company websites for any recalls or review customers’ experiences with those products at www.SaferProducts.gov.
  3. Install fire-prevention equipment. Each level of a home and every bedroom should have a working smoke alarm. Consumer Reports recommends smoke alarms have both photoelectric and ionization sensors to provide the fastest response to any type of fire. Also, keep one full-floor fire extinguisher (rated 2-A:10-B:C or greater) on every level, plus a smaller supplemental unit in the kitchen.
  4. Inspect power cords. Check for frayed power cords and never route electric cords (including extension cords) under carpeting, where they can overheat or be damaged by furniture.
  5. Check home wiring. The electrical wiring in older homes cannot always handle the demands of modern appliances. Systems should be inspected by a qualified electrician. An upgrade to wiring may cost several hundred dollars, but is likely worth the added expense.
  6. Practice kitchen safety. Unattended cooking is a common fire-starter, whether using a range or microwave oven. If small children are home, maintain a kids-free-zone of at least 3 feet and use back burners when possible. Consumers should unplug their small appliances, including toasters and coffeemakers, when not in use and or when planning to be away for long periods.
  7. Clear range hoods. Grease buildup in range hoods is another fire hazard, so be sure to clean the vents regularly.
  8. Keep dryer vents clear. Clean the lint screen in the dryer regularly to avoid buildup, which has been listed as a factor in many fires. Use rigid metal dryer ducts instead of flexible ducts made of foil or plastic, which can sag and let lint build. Check ducts regularly and remove any lint buildup.

Once again, another example of how products that are sold everyday today in the United States are not safe.  While federal agencies and private watchdog groups can do much to fight against people being hurt or killed by dangerous products, the truth remains that longstanding products liability laws on the books in Indiana, Illinois, and other states remains one of the strongest weapons against this type of tragedy.  Sad but true that for some manufacturers and distributors and sellers of products today, it is only when they are faced with harm to their bottom line that they will do the right thing.

Be careful out there.

FDA Whistleblowers Sue FDA For Spying on Their Personal Emails: Messages to Congress About Product Dangers Were Being Monitored by FDA

January 31st, 2012 by admin

More news that should serve as a warning to the American public that the products that they buy on their grocery store shelves and that they purchase as over the counter drugs or as prescription medicine should not be blindly trusted: it seems that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has just been sued by six doctors and scientists – all former employees of the FDA.

Why?  These top professionals have filed a lawsuit because they have found out that the FDA was spying on these doctors’ and scientists’ personal email accounts (Gmail).

Seems that the FDA was interested in reading the personal emails of these Six FDA Employees because these six individuals had had the courage to tell members of Congress that they were concerned because the FDA was going ahead and approving products which these six FDA employees thought were NOT SAFE.

Media investigations have occurred and now, the news stories include the release of federal government documents confirming that the personal emails were monitored, and for a long time, too.  Apparently, according to a Washington Post expose, the FDA employees’ personal email accounts were being spied upon for over two years.

Here, though, the big news isn’t a media scoop.  Here, these six courageous individuals haven’t just voiced concerns to Congress — now, they’ve gone and filed a civil lawsuit in federal court based upon the sneaky behavior of the FDA.   They are claiming damages to their careers because of what’s happened, among other things.

It’s going to be more of a right of privacy case more than a fight over whether or not those products are indeed unsafe.  The safety of the products are not the focus of this litigation (but should be a very, very big lesson to us all).

Was the constitutional right to privacy guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution violated when the FDA instituted surveillance on its own employees?  (The FDA, of course, will argue no; that by using the work computers, these folk couldn’t have any reasonable expectation of privacy.)

Bottom line, products liability laws exist in Indiana and Illinois and every other state in the union because all too often, Americans are hurt or killed by products (food  and drugs among them) that they have legitimately purchased at a store with the expectation that the product is safe to use.   Americans cannot depend upon manufacturers, distributors, sellers, etc. to protect them from dangerous products.   Unsafe products are put into the marketplace all the time.

Now, the Federal and Drug Administration’s dependability and integrity has been called into question by this agency spying upon employees who were whistleblowing about product safety to members of Congress.

If you or a loved one has been hurt or injured or even suffered a wrongful death because of food or drugs or medication — then your most solid and dependable avenue of justice remains with the personal injury system of  justice and filing a products liability lawsuit under state law.

Concussion Laws in Indiana and Illinois Try to Keep Kids Safer As They Play Football and Other School Sports

January 26th, 2012 by admin

We’ve posted about new research studies that confirm how young kids playing hockey or football or other contact sports at their school can be seriously injured and permanently disabled by brain injuries and concussions.

Slowly but surely, state legislatures are starting to take heed of these research results (and the outcry from parents whose kids have been hurt while playing a sport) and now, Indiana and Illinois have both recently passed state concussion laws.

According to SafeKids.Org, Indiana and Illinois joined 31 other states in passing legislation designed to protect children playing school sports from suffering concussions and permanent brain injuries.

Illinois Concussion Law (Public Act 097-0204)

Under the Illinois Concussion Law, each school board must adopt a concussion policy that conforms to the established guidelines of the Illinois High School Association.

Both the student athlete and the student’s parent must sign a written acknowledgement of the school’s concussion policy.

Before a student athlete can play a sport again after being removed from play because of concussion or suspected concussion, the student has to be checked by a health care provider and that provider must give the student a written clearance to participate in the sporting activity.

Indiana Concussion Law (Indiana Code 20-34-7)

The Indiana Concussion Law tasks the State Department of Education with the dissemination of guidelines, information sheets, and forms detailing the nature and risk of concussions and head injuries to schools which are to distribute the Department’s work to school coaches, student athletes and parents of student athletes.

In Indiana, all high school student athletes and their parents must acknowledge by their signature that they have received the Department of Education’s brain injury and concussion information on a form collected by the student athlete’s coach each year before the student can start his or her first practice.

If there is a suspicion that a student athlete has sustained a head injury or concussion, the student must be removed from play at that time (the time of the suspected injury).  He or she cannot return to the sport until the student has been evaluated by a licensed health care provider trained in head injuries and that health care provider has given him or her a written clearance form to return to play.

Summary of New Fed Laws Governing Commercial Truck Drivers Effective February 27, 2012: Making the Roads Safer For All of Us (If They Are Followed)

January 24th, 2012 by admin

Approximately one month from today, on February 27, 2012, federal law will change regarding commercial trucks driven on American roads as the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) rule changes go into effect.  These are a part of the Hours of Service regulations that have been so hotly debated over the past few years.

We’ve posted about aspects of these new rules before along with the trucking industry’s response to the agency’s proposals; however, it’s important to know the extent of what these new laws are – especially when trucking companies are already voicing their concerns that these new regulations will burden those trying to logistically plan trucking routes.

Summary of the New FMCSA Truck Driver Rules Effective February 2012

Here is a summary of the new February 2012 rules that govern truck drivers driving commercial trucks (big rigs; semis; tractor trailers; etc.) as passed by FMCSA (others will become law later in the year):

1.  Restarts. Two rules work together to impose a new regulation involving 34-hour restarts.

  • 34 hour restarts can be used once a week
  • must have 1 AM to 5 AM home terminal time

2.  Rest Breaks. Now, a new rule requires that trucks cannot drive any longer than 8 hours without taking a 30 minute rest break.

3.  On-Duty Time.  If the truck driver is resting in a parked truck, then he or she can count this as rest time; it is no longer considered on-duty time even though they technically may be setting behind the wheel. It can extend the weekly limits but it cannot extend the 14 consecutive hour daily limit. There is no limit on how long the trucker can rest in a parked truck.

4.  In Attendance Time. This can be tallied as break time if the truck driver is not doing any other work tasks at the time.

5.  Daily HOS Violations. FMCSA considers that 3 hours of HOS violations as ‘egregious’ (i.e., going over the 11 hour per day limit by 3 or more hours) which will be reflected in higher fines, to the tune of $2,750 for the driver and $11,000 for the carrier.

Hours of Service regulations are designed to protect the truck driver and those with whom he shares the road from the ramifications of driving too far and too long without a break behind the wheel of a big commercial vehicle.  The tragedies of big rig semi trucks crashing with other vehicles on the road (which usually weigh so much less than that tractor trailer truck) are often horrific as fatalities are usually involved.

These new regulations are designed to save lives.  And they will.  If truck drivers and carriers follow them.

Indiana Nursing Homes Should Call the Closest EMS in Emergencies, But They’ve Been Known to Choose the Cheaper Option

January 19th, 2012 by admin

Barbara Parcel died last March because her nursing home didn’t call the 911 responders that were minutes away, but instead contacted a hired company that was much farther away.  That company’s EMS unit arrived too late to save Mrs. Parcel, who died from a heart attack there at Indiana’s  Kindred Healthcare’s Wildwood Healthcare.  Her friend, Elsie, was a witness to the events and reported that it took over an hour for the EMS ambulance to show up in order to transport Mrs. Parcel to the hospital.

Local news reporters (13 Investigates) first discovered that the nursing home had never called 911, which would have brought nearby paramedics to the scene; instead Wildwood Healthcare called the private ambulance company with which it had a contract.  We can assume it was cheaper for Wildwood to call the contract service than to call the 911 service.   You can read the March 2011 expose online here.

Indiana State Senator Patricia Miller Pushes Senate Bill 0224 as New Indiana Law for Nursing Homes

Responding to the tragic story of Barbara Parcel, Indiana State Senator Patricia Miller authored and presented a bill which should become law in the State of Indiana.  You can read the proposed law as she wrote it here.

If passed, this law will require nursing homes to forego their bottom line and to call to get the fastest emergency medical services team in place.  Which is good news for everyone who either lives in an assisted facility or who has a loved one residing in a nursing home.

You can track the bill as it moves through the Indiana Legislature here.

Indiana Courts Are Already At the Ready to Right Nursing Home Abuse and Neglect

Nursing homes have a legal duty to care for those that reside at their facilities.  If they fail to meet that duty, just as a doctor fails in his care of a patient or a hospital commits an error in care, they can be found legally responsible for the wrongful death of their resident.

These laws are already on the books for Indiana victims and their families.  They are made the basis of a personal injury lawsuit filed against the nursing home and anyone else that has contributed to the harm.

New Illinois Laws To Protect People From Injury or Death: 2012 Has Lots of New Safety Statutes on the Books

January 12th, 2012 by admin

In addition to the new law that lets motorcycles and bicycles run red lights in the State of Illinois that we posted about last week, a lot of other laws were passed by a busy state legislature that are intended to make life safer for everyone in Illinois, including the following laws that have been passed in hopes that injuries and death will be averted:

1.  Injuries or Deaths in Airplane Crashes. It is against the law in Illinois for anyone to shine a laser light into the cockpit of an airplane that is in the process of taking off or landing. And, yes, apparently this had been happening quite a bit in the Chicago O’Hare area. (House Bill 167)

2. Injuries or Deaths in School and Playground Injuries.  Now, Illinois school officials can suspend, or even permanently expel, any public school student who threatens another student or an employee of the school district, via the Web in online bullying. (House Bill 3281)

3.  Injuries or Deaths in Auto Accidents. Now, adults riding in the back seat of a car must buckle up just like those in the front seat, or face being fined and ticketed. (House Bill 219)

4.  Injuries or Deaths in Big Rig Crashes. Now, semi trucks can drive along Illinois roadways just like any small sedan at the exact same speed, not just in certain sections of trucking routes (Senate Bill 1913)

Illinois New Law Lets Motorcycles and Bicycles Run Red Lights: Sounds Good, But There are Risks

January 10th, 2012 by admin

Motorcycles are dangerous for those who ride them on Illinois roadways, but there are many people living in Indiana and Illinois and elsewhere that love their motorcycles and believe that riding a motorcycle offers a kind of freedom that cannot be found elsewhere.  For motorcycle riders everywhere, there’s a new law in Illinois that may sound very, very good: now, in Illinois, motorcyclists (and those on bicycles, too) can run red lights.

Run That Red Light in Illinois.  It’s Legal Now.

Effective January 2012, in Illinois a new law has been passed that allows those riding on motorcycles and bicycles to run a red light, but there’s a hitch.  They do have to wait a ‘reasonable’ amount of time.  (Police are suggesting that “reasonable” means two minutes.)

Now, the Illinois Legislature had its reasons.  Motorcycles and bikes will be allowed to run red lights after a “reasonable” time because they don’t weigh enough to be recognized by the the traffic-light sensors.  Which means, until now, they could just sit there at a red light until a car or truck or some sort of vehicle that had enough weight to trigger the sensor pulled up.  Or they could run the red light and hope for the best.

The new law states:

After stopping, the driver of a motorcycle or bicycle facing a steady red signal which fails to change to a green signal within a reasonable period of time because of a signal malfunction or because the signal has failed to detect the arrival of the motorcycle or bicycle due to the vehicle’s size or weight, shall have the right to proceed subject to the rules applicable after making a stop at a stop sign as required by section 11-1204 of this code.

This is a good thing, makes sense.  It does mean that riders need to be even more vigilant before pulling out into the roadway against that red light.  Motorcycle accidents are often the cause of serious injury or death to the motorcyclist and by taking advantage of this statute, a defense attorney may try and argue in the future that the motorcycle rider bore the risk of his injuries or wrongful death even though a car or truck crashed into him, so the insurance company doesn’t have to pay a claim.

Be careful out there.

Illinois Supreme Court Case Does Not Make Hosts Responsible for Underage Drinking at Their Home

January 5th, 2012 by admin

In each state, the highest court in the land makes decisions that in turn become law for that state – just like the state legislature, just like the Governor and his branch.  Recently, the Illinois Supreme Court made some law that impacts everyone in Illinois – at least anyone who ever acts as a “social host” at their home or lets their kids goes to visit someone else’s house.

The case is Bell v. Hutsell.  You can read it online here.

In the case itself a young man (18 years old) named Daniel Bell went over to his friend’s house for a party.  Daniel drank at the party and then Daniel left the party in a car and was tragically killed in a car crash.

Daniel Bell’s mother sued, based on that automobile accident, under the Illinois wrongful death statutes, and that lawsuit made its way up from the trial court through the lower leel appellate court to the highest court in the state, the Illinois Supreme Court.

There, the question boiled down to whether or not under Illinois law, Janet Bell as the grieving mother of Daniel Bell could be awarded damages from the parents of Daniel’s friend who hosted the party at their house where Daniel went and drank the alcoholic beverages that ultimately resulted in his death.

After all, the parents knew there were minors at the party; they knew that alcohol was present; and they knew that the minors were drinking it.  The parents where the house party was taking place didn’t do anything to stop the underage drinking.

Legally, the question became whether or not the parents who had the party in their home where minors were drinking could be held liable for a minor guest’s death under the theory of social host liability.

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the parents of Daniel Bell’s friend did not have a legal duty to prevent underage drinking on their property under Illinois law.  This meant that the Bell’s wrongful death action lost one of it’s elements — duty under the law — and now, they’ve lost their son and their wrongful death lawsuit has been dismissed.

Remember this, when your teenagers leave to go to a party.  Those parents aren’t going to be responsible under Illinois Law to supervise any underage drinking there.

Toy Safety: Protecting Children From Being Hurt By Dangerous Toys That Are Sold Everyday

January 3rd, 2012 by admin

Now that the holidays are over and the wrapping paper has been tossed and the batteries bought, those new shiny toys are being used quite a bit by happy kids all over Indiana and Illinois and all the rest of the good old U.S.A.

Problem is: profit happy toy companies still sell toys that can serious injure children all for the sake of making a buck.  And, as a recent article in the Los Angeles Times reports, it’s usually only after innocent little ones have been hurt that we hear about another dangerous or deadly toy that has been manufactured, distributed, and sold in this country. To read the entire Los Angeles Times article, check out “Parents, you are top regulator when it comes to toy safety.

The news story has it partly right.  Parents are the first line of defense when there is a dangerous toy.  However, toy safety must be a concern at any day care, elementary school, or child-friendly pizza joint where toys and kids coexist.

If your child is injured by a toy, then not only are the toy makers responsible, but the seller as well as the place where the child came into contact with that toy may be legally responsible as well (including schools, restaurants, doctors’ offices, playgrounds, etc.).

The Child Safety Protection Act was passed in 2005 to help protect kids from harm.  You can read its online fact sheet here.  This is federal law that holds manufacturers, etc. responsible for toy safety.  Product liabilty laws in both Indiana and Illinois also exist to protect kids who have been hurt by a toy.

26th Annual Trouble in Toyland Study Released for 2011

Every year for many years now, a non-profit organization — USPIRG — has released its annual study of dangerous toys and toy safety.  This year, “Trouble in Toyland” reported that there are still dangers present in the American marketplace for children and their toys.  Included in their concerns:

Lead Continues to be a Hazard in Toys
Exposure to lead can affect almost every organ and system in the human body, especially the central nervous system. Lead is especially harmful to the brains of young children and has no business in children’s products. This year our investigators found 2 toys whose lead levels exceeded the current 300ppm standard set by the CPSIA and one additional toy that exceeded its prospective 100ppm standard; we found 4 additional toys that exceeded the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation that lead levels in toys should not exceed 40ppm.

Phthalates in Toys
Numerous studies have documented the potential negative health effects of exposure to phthalates in the womb or in child development. U.S. EPA studies show the cumulative impact of different phthalates leads to an exponential increase in harms including premature delivery and reproductive defects. The CPSIA permanently banned toys containing three phthalates and set temporary limits on three others, while tests continue. No toy or childcare article can contain more than 1000ppm of each of the six phthalates.

This year, we found two toys that laboratory testing showed to contain 42,000 ppm and 77,000 ppm levels of phthalates. These products exceed limits allowed by the CPSIA by 42 and 77 times, respectively.

Choking Hazards
Choking on small toy parts, on small balls, on marbles and balloons continues to be the major cause of toy-related deaths and injuries. Between 1990 and 2010, over 200 children died from a choking incident.

This year we found several toys that violated CPSC’s small parts for toys standard intended for children less than 3 years old. We also found “near small part” toys that – while not in violation of current regulations — support our call for the small parts test to be made less permissive. Finally, we found toys intended for older children that failed to provide choking hazards warnings required for small parts or small balls.

Noisy Toys
Research has shown a third of Americans with hearing loss can attribute it in part to noise. The third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey showed one in five U.S. children will have some degree of hearing loss by the time they reach age 12; this may be in part due to many children using toys and other children’s products that emit loud sounds such as music players. The National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders advises that prolonged exposure to noise above 85 decibels will cause gradual hearing loss in any age range. We found 1 toy on store shelves that exceeded the recommended continuous exposure to 85-decibel limit and 2 close-to-the-ear toys that exceeded the 65 decibel limit when measured with a digital sound level meter.

Indiana State Fair Tragedy Labelled Biggest Story of 2011: Where You Get Injured Makes a Difference in Damages Award You May Receive

December 27th, 2011 by admin

In one of the many end of the year recaps that are being circulated this week, the Indianapolis Star has published its article “the Top 10 Local Stories of 2011,” and topping their list is the tragic crash of the stage rigging at this year’s Indiana State Fair.  (For details, check out our earlier post here or watch this video where Kenneth J. Allen discusses the State Fair tragedy’s consequences.)

One Lesson From the Indiana State Fair Tragedy: Justice May Depend Upon Where the Accident Happened

As Kenneth J. Allen discusses in the above video, the fact that this tragedy took place where it did made a difference for those seeking personal injury damages under the law.  An injury that occurred on a government-related site got different treatment under the law than if would have if the exact same incident had happened at a privately owned location.  The Indiana State Fair took place on state owned fairgrounds.

Under Indiana law, this meant that a cap applied to the damages claim: a cap of $5 million.  If the accident had not been on publicly owned land, then the cap would not be an issue.

Attorney General Announces Settlement in December 2011 – $5 Million is Paid Out

On December 19, 2011, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller officially announced that settlements had been reached with 64 of the 65 claimants in the Indiana State Fair tragedy and that his office expected checks to begin being sent out to these victims by the end of the month. 

Meanwhile, Kenneth J. Allen is working for justice here, going into federal court to ask that this $5 million cap be nixed for the Indiana State Fair victims.  In December 2011, the federal judge okayed Allen’s plan to have federal review of the situation. More on that fight in the months to come.

The Indiana Attorney General seems to have ended 2011 with checks being sent and an idea that this is a done deal.  From the AG’s news release:

“Deciding on compensation for the victims of the State Fair tragedy is one of the most difficult duties the Indiana Attorney General’s Office has ever undertaken. From the start we knew that no matter how we divided the $5 million available, it could never replace the seven lives lost nor erase the pain of the injured and grieving. We did all that was possible to treat victims equitably and to assist them with their medical and financial needs within the amount the law allows,” Zoeller said.

Defending the state’s Tort Claim Fund, which is made up of tax dollars, from claims and potential lawsuits is one of the duties of the Indiana Attorney General’s Office. After the deadly stage rigging collapse August 13 at the Indiana State Fair, Zoeller announced that he would make available the $5 million in tort claim funds the State has, without regard to liability.

Working with nationally-known expert Kenneth Feinberg who administered victim compensation programs after 9/11 and the BP Gulf oil spill, Zoeller’s office designed a victim-centered program where victims could submit tort claims to the state and receive settlement payments on an expedited basis, even if they did not hire an attorney.

A total of 114 individual claimants – including the representatives of the seven deceased – filed a total 101 claims and utilized a customized State Fair claim form the Attorney General’s Office developed. The State also retained a claims management firm, JWF Specialty Company, to receive and review the claims and follow up with claimants to obtain additional medical documentation.

Under the compensation protocol Feinberg helped design, the estates of the seven deceased victims were guaranteed settlements of at least $300,000 each. Another 58 claimants who were most seriously injured and met at least one other protocol criteria were offered payments equal to approximately 65 percent of their medical and hospital bills submitted to date. Since that amount will exhaust the rest of the $5 million the State has available, claimants with non-physical injuries did not receive settlement offers under the protocol.

To be offered settlements, claimants or their attorneys were required to submit documentation of hospital expenses; the form asked that documentation be attached. Offers could not be extended to any claim that lacked medical documentation or where the requested information was not provided. JWF Specialty Company was available to answer questions from claimants and their attorneys throughout the process.

On December 6 the State sent offer notices to 65 eligible claimants or their representatives requesting a prompt reply. Although claimants had the legal right to decline the offers, all but one accepted, including the estates of all seven deceased victims. The remaining $1,691 that one claimant’s attorney declined was redistributed among the other 64 claimants and their offers were recalculated. By accepting offers, claimants sign settlement documents releasing the State of Indiana from future liability. That does not prevent claimants from pursuing separate legal actions against other private entities over the stage rigging collapse.

After offers were extended, three claimants identified conflicting medical billing data that had been previously submitted to claims manager JWF Specialty Company during the claim-filing period. The disputed claims were carefully reviewed, and the State and JWF agreed to resolve the disputes in favor of the claimants, meaning their offers were revised upward by a combined total of $33,027.31. Since by law the State’s cap per incident is a total $5 million and cannot exceed that, JWF Specialty Company graciously agreed to pick up the difference and pay the increased offers to the three claimants out of its own funds.

“JWF Specialty provided invaluable service to the State under extraordinarily difficult circumstances under an accelerated claims-review period. We appreciate their good corporate citizenship in resolving disputes in favor of the claimants in keeping with a victim-centered approach, and we thank them for their expertise on an extremely complicated claims-management process. There was nearly 100 percent participation from those claimants who were offered settlements, an indication we believe of how carefully the protocol was developed,” Zoeller said.

During the process of calculating settlement offers, the Attorney General’s Office participated in mediation with a group of approximately 30 attorneys and law firms representing many claimants and reached tentative accord on the protocol. Settlement offers are with the consent of the Governor’s Office.

“Members of the legal profession who met repeatedly with the State to reach consensus on a compensation program for their clients should be commended for helping bring this process to an expedited conclusion. And I’m enormously grateful to Kenneth Feinberg who donated his services at no charge to the State of Indiana or taxpayers. His wisdom from developing past victim compensation programs after other tragedies was indispensible to my office in helping us navigate through difficult questions. The work of the Attorney General’s Office does not end here and we will continue to diligently represent the State in legal matters involving the State Fair tragedy,” Zoeller said.

Now that the final list of accepted offers has been calculated, the State Auditor’s Office will begin the process of issuing payments by check or electronic funds transfer. The first group of checks is scheduled to be mailed Wednesday and the process should be complete by the end of the year. JWF Specialty Company will follow up with any claimants from whom any additional paperwork is needed.