Opinion

In Re Hailey

  • 792 N.E.2d 851
  • 2003 Ind. LEXIS 665
  • 2003 WL 21872484
Court
Indiana Supreme Court
Filed
Aug 8, 2003
Status
Published
Author
Sullivan
On the bench
Boehm, Rucker, Sullivan, Shepard
Cited by
10 cases

defining present value as the total sum of future payments based upon the plaintiff's projected life expectancy discounted to reduce the sum to its value in "today's dollars"

How later courts described this case

  • defining present value as the total sum of future payments based upon the plaintiff's projected life expectancy discounted to reduce the sum to its value in "today's dollars"

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

SULLIVAN, Justice,

concurring and dissenting.

I concur in the Court’s opinion except as to sanction. I agree that respondent’s career and contributions to the profession are weighty mitigating circumstances. I nevertheless believe a period of suspension is warranted. While I would find a public reprimand sufficient sanction for any of the violations standing alone, I believe it is insufficient for the combination of violations committed here. I do concur with the Court’s directing the respondent to refund the excess of the fee with interest and to reimburse the clients for the attorneys fees they incurred to prod him to complete the project.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.