Sen. Leising has introduced SB 84 which makes police crash reports confidential for 90 days except under certain circumstances – mostly people with direct involvement with the crash or paying for it.
The intent of the bill is pretty clearly to prevent the current practice where personal injury attorneys just order crash reports in bulk and send solicitations to just about everyone. But the bill is probably unworkable and more trouble than it’s worth.
I appreciate the intent though. This summer moving across town from my old house to my current house, had a very minor fender bender. I had a small pain in my neck which I mentioned to the investigating officer just because, if it did turn into something more significant, I didn’t want some defense attorney or insurance adjuster telling me I hadn’t mentioned anything at the time of the accident. My first mail at the new house consisted of about five solicitations from personal injury attorneys. Classy.
That bill is awfully petty. Is this really such a problem that we need to crap up the Indiana code with one more law?
Seriously, people are complaining about getting unsolicited mail? The horror!
This is a stupid law and waste of time. I’ve been in an accident. Got five or six of those letters a day. Didn’t open a one. Threw them away. Didn’t bother me a bit. We have bigger problems than being annoyed at mail. Seriously.
Cities and counties must make a fortune selling these reports. As an insurance agent, I pay between $5-12 per report because police don’t let people talk to one another after an accident. No own seems to know how to collect information and “your agent will get you a copy.” How much are they in bulk?
What’s your address, Doug? I need to send you a letter.
Seriously, while lawyer solicitations are often tacky and tasteless, I think they’re protected by the First Amendment. The Free Speech Clause isn’t just about protecting good speech.
If’ a local government vehicle involved, the motorist would have 180 days to send a notice of tort claim. The 90 days would cut seriously into that. Of course, I have a very negative view of the notice requirement. Rarely does gov’t ever do an investigqation or attempt to resolve the case out of court – the purpose of the notice. Rather they just use it instead to trip up unwary litigants who don’t know about the requirement.
Open records are *far* more important than some people being slightly annoyed by some junk mail.
My guess is that this law would at least slightly reduce the amount of PI litigation, because some of the solicitations result in claims that are, shall we say, exaggerated. And some of those, ‘ahem’, exaggerations would prove more difficult if commenced at a later date.
Just some observations: do not believe any legislative remedy exists for cutting down on “ambulance chasers”—such as local example: phone was ringing with accident victim got home from the accident; town received a form letter from a highly advertised attorney listing something over two dozen “problems” with the accident site including “inadequate lighting at the intersection”–event occurred at noon. For our attorney members on the blog–how about a strong ethics postion from the industry rather than invite legislation.
Off topic: Doug, have you seen SB 105, the municipal bankruptcy bill? That could be the most significant law passed this session.
There are three municipalities in Lake County that the DLGF has warned are on the verge of bankruptcy. This bill gives us a way to make that happen without hurting the credit ratings of every other municipality in Indiana. The emergency manager has many of the powers of a judge in bankruptcy (like being able to discharge labor contracts), without the stigma of an actual bankruptcy.
I haven’t seen that one, but I’ll take a look. Might be above my pay grade though. Bankruptcy gives me a headache.
Oh, and Jack – I’m pretty sure I know that form letter. One or two law firms out there will frequently send a notice of tort claim full of boilerplate allegations about road deficiencies when they happen to have a personal injury crash case in the county – regardless of whether it’s county jurisdiction, regardless of whether they have any real intent to pursue a tort claim. I understand the need to preserve your options in the face of a short tort claim limitations period and before a very full investigation, but these are just forms churned out. There is no evidence that there has been any thought about whether the alleged deficiencies have any basis in fact. Strikes me as an ethical problem.