State Ex Rel. Family & Social Services Administration v. Estate of Roy

I concur in Part I of the majority opinion but respectfully dissent from Part II, regarding the Estate’s cross-appeal. Although I appreciate the majority’s careful analysis of the interplay between Indiana Code Sections 29-l-7-15.1(b) and 29-1-15-3,1 must disagree with their conclusion that Subsection 15.1(b) does not preclude the sale of Roy’s real property to pay a debt owed to FSSA. Even though some of the language in Subsection 15.1(b) appears antiquated, any statute must be given effect unless and until the General Assembly decides to repeal it. To give effect to Subsection 15.1(b), I…