id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
inlawrev-3438	Meyer, Tammy J.; Lansberry, Kyle A.	Recent Developments in Indiana Tort Law	2000	66	.pdf	application/pdf	31380	1779	64	Thus, the plaintiffargued that personal maintenance evidence is never admissible in a wrongful death action.^^' The court of appeals found that the Indiana Supreme Court had long interpreted the damage provision ofthe Wrongful Death Act to permit recovery for a decedent's lost earnings, but that such precedent also required that those damages be reduced by the decedent's personal maintenance expenses.^^^ The court noted, however, that the 1965 amendments to the Wrongful Death Statute had previously unmentioned language with respect to a decedent's lost earnings and found that since that time Indiana appellate courts have not addressed whether trial courts are required to admit or exclude evidence of personal maintenance expenses pursuant to this provision.^^^ In response, defendants argued that statements ofthe Indiana Supreme Court in Burnett v. State,^^^ suggested that the supreme court believed personal maintenance evidence relevant in determining wrongful death damages.^^^ However, the court of appeals stated that, although these statements by the supreme court do suggest that the court believes personal maintenance evidence relevant in determining wrongful death damages, it did not believe the supreme 347. I. Negligence A. Landowners ' Potential Responsibilityfor Third-Party Criminal Attacks During the course of this survey period, Indiana courts rendered numerous decisions interpreting a landowner's potential responsibility for third-party criminal attacks upon invitees.	cache/inlawrev-3438.pdf	txt/inlawrev-3438.txt