IBJNews

Supreme Court takes up case on death records

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An attorney for an Evansville newspaper on Thursday told the Indiana Supreme Court that the public should be able to find out a person’s cause of death.

But the Vanderburgh County Health Department argued that state law says otherwise.

The Indiana Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a lawsuit the Evansville Courier & Press and Pike County resident Rita Ward filed against the county health department. The court is considering whether the cause of death listed on death certificates is a public record.

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller filed an amicus brief – also known as a friend-of-the-court brief – supporting the newspaper’s argument, even though the state is not a party in the case.

“In keeping with the principles of transparency and accountability, we ask merely for a return to what had been the longstanding practice of making the cause of death in death certificates promptly available to the public who has the right to that information,” Zoeller said in a statement.

At issue is the difference between the death certificate and the online death registry, which are governed by separate state laws. State law requires counties to keep death certificates, which list the cause of death. But the state also maintains an online registry – and only spouses, immediate family or others with a direct interest have access to that information.

Vanderburgh County officials say they maintain all their records on the database. And because state law restricts access to that information, the public and the newspaper can’t obtain the cause of death from it.

The health department’s attorney, Joseph Harrison, argued that to receive the death certificate a person must meet the requirements and have “direct interest in the matter.”

“To me, the legislature has already spoken on this issue it is clear you can’t go to department of health and ask for the death certificate with the cause of death listed,” said Harrison.

But attorney Patrick Shoulders, representing the paper and Ward, argued that the statewide registry is separate from the health department’s statutory responsibility to maintain death certificates and release them to the public.

The Indiana Supreme Court took the case under advisement and will rule at a later date.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I'm a CPA who works with a wide range of companies (through my firm K.B.Parrish & Co.); however, we work with quite a few car dealerships, so I'm fairly interested in Fatwin (mentioned in the article). Does anyone have much information on that, or a link to such information? Thanks.

  2. Historically high long-term unemployment, unprecedented labor market slack and the loss of human capital should not be accepted as "the economy at work [and] what is supposed to happen" and is certainly not raising wages in Indiana. See Chicago Fed Reserve: goo.gl/IJ4JhQ Also, here's our research on Work Sharing and our support testimony at yesterday's hearing: goo.gl/NhC9W4

  3. I am always curious why teachers don't believe in accountability. It's the only profession in the world that things they are better than everyone else. It's really a shame.

  4. It's not often in Indiana that people from both major political parties and from both labor and business groups come together to endorse a proposal. I really think this is going to help create a more flexible labor force, which is what businesses claim to need, while also reducing outright layoffs, and mitigating the impact of salary/wage reductions, both of which have been highlighted as important issues affecting Hoosier workers. Like many other public policies, I'm sure that this one will, over time, be tweaked and changed as needed to meet Indiana's needs. But when you have such broad agreement, why not give this a try?

  5. I could not agree more with Ben's statement. Every time I look at my unemployment insurance rate, "irritated" hardly describes my sentiment. We are talking about a surplus of funds, and possibly refunding that, why, so we can say we did it and get a notch in our political belt? This is real money, to real companies, large and small. The impact is felt across the board; in the spending of the company, the hiring (or lack thereof due to higher insurance costs), as well as in the personal spending of the owners of a smaller company.

ADVERTISEMENT