Indiana Court of Appeals Now Split on Whether Location of Registered Agent Sufficient for Preferred Venue

Indiana Court of Appeals Now Split on Whether Location of Registered Agent Sufficient for Preferred Venue

This week’s discussion returns to the issue of whether the location of a registered agent can provide the basis for preferred venue in Indiana after the Court of Appeals issued a decision directly in conflict with Morrison v. Vasquez, which had held in August that a newly adopted statute removed registered agents from consideration for preferred venue.

Read More

Seventh Circuit Provides Guidance on Certifying Class Definition and Claims Differing from Those Proposed in Complaint

Seventh Circuit Provides Guidance on Certifying Class Definition and Claims Differing from Those Proposed in Complaint

This week we discuss the Seventh Circuit’s opinion in Beaton v. SpeedyPC Software, which weighed in on the propriety of certifying a class narrower than the definition proposed in the complaint and upon claims not specifically identified in the complaint. We also briefly look at eight other appellate decisions from the past two weeks that include: (i) holding that the misuse defense under Indiana’s Products Liability Act can be a complete defense; (ii) a party’s complete about-face can be a basis for surprise to obtain relief from a judgment under Trial Rule 60(B)(1); (iii) multi-year assertion that a defendant is subject to the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act and numerous delays to await a medical review panel determination can be sufficient to estop a plaintiff from arguing that the defendant is not subject to the Medical Malpractice Act; (iv) contracts attached to complaints are admissible as evidence at trial even if not specifically identified in final exhibits list; (v) a claim for unjust enrichment can be made even if the benefits are provided by a third-party; (vi) courts may commit reversible error when elevating formality over substantial justice with overly rigid application of procedure at trial; (vii) illustrating considerations in applying the doctrines of apparent authority and apparent agency; and (viii) citations to the record along with other citations count toward the word limit in federal appellate filings despite no rule specifically stating that citations are included in the word count.

Read More

Indiana Court of Appeals Reminds That Judgments Cannot be Entered Without Personal Jurisdiction

Indiana Court of Appeals Reminds That Judgments Cannot be Entered Without Personal Jurisdiction

This discussion focuses on the need to perfect service in Indiana in order to obtain personal jurisdiction and how the failure to do so may render even an out-of-state judgment void.

Read More

Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Location of Registered Agent No Longer Basis for Preferred Venue

Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Location of Registered Agent No Longer Basis for Preferred Venue

In this post, we discuss the Indiana Court of Appeals ruling in Morrison v. Vasquez holding that the place of a “registered agent” is no longer a basis for preferred venue under Trial Rule 75(A)(4) and why it may not be correct.

Read More

Indiana Court of Appeals: $1.3M Verdict Not Excessive for Rear-End Collision & Not Reversible Error to Exclude Evidence of Prior Discipline of Medical Expert

Indiana Court of Appeals: $1.3M Verdict Not Excessive for Rear-End Collision & Not Reversible Error to Exclude Evidence of Prior Discipline of Medical Expert

This week we look at Tunstall v. Manning, in which the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a $1.3M verdict for a woman who suffered spinal injuries in a rear-end collision and further ruled that it was not reversible error, if error at all, to exclude evidence of the plaintiff’s medical expert’s prior professional discipline because he was no longer subject to discipline at the time of trial.

Read More

Seventh Circuit Affirms Piercing Corporate Veil to Attach $7.5m Judgment

Seventh Circuit Affirms Piercing Corporate Veil to Attach $7.5m Judgment

Today’s discussion looks at numerous recent cases ranging from the use of unsigned depositions at summary judgment, the possible need to provide details in support of damages calculations for actions sounding in breach of contract, whether Goodwin and Rogers apply to duty analyses beyond premises liability, the grounds for awarding class-action attorney fees, the scope of specific personal jurisdiction under Indiana law, and then take a deeper dive into the Seventh Circuit’s opinion affirming a bankruptcy court’s decision to pierce a corporate veil in order to attach a $7.5m judgment held by a former shareholder against the lone remaining shareholder.

Read More

Indiana Court of Appeals: Developments in Litigation Can Allow Remand for Failure to Meet Amount in Controversy and Recovery in Excess of $75,000

Indiana Court of Appeals: Developments in Litigation Can Allow Remand for Failure to Meet Amount in Controversy and Recovery in Excess of $75,000

Today, we look at a case whose procedural posture may be almost impossible to replicate that resulted in a successful remand motion from federal court in which the plaintiff asserted that the amount in controversy did not exceed $75,000 and an appellate court affirming a subsequent state-court jury verdict for $187,500.

Read More

Indiana: Filing an Appeal With a Pending Motion to Correct Error

Indiana: Filing an Appeal With a Pending Motion to Correct Error

Today’s discussion focuses on a narrow issue of appellate practice on which the Indiana Court of Appeals has now spoken strongly: “Even if our trial and appellate rules do not expressly forbid the simultaneous filings of motions to correct error and notices of appeal by one party—or the filing of a notice of appeal before a motion to correct error has been ruled on or deemed denied—we believe it is inadvisable to do so.”

Read More

What Happens When Wrongful Death Beneficiary Dies During Lawsuit? Depends on Whether there are Heirs

What Happens When Wrongful Death Beneficiary Dies During Lawsuit? Depends on Whether there are Heirs

The takeaway from this post is that if you are representing a wrongful death estate and the survivor has no natural heir, make sure s/he has a will or the claim will die with the survivor.

Read More

Why Summary Judgment Predicated on Defense of Contributory Negligence is Almost Impossible in Indiana

Why Summary Judgment Predicated on Defense of Contributory Negligence is Almost Impossible in Indiana

Today, we look at the propriety of adjudicating personal injury cases on the basis of a contributory negligence defense at summary judgment through the lens of the new decision in Gonzalez v. Ritz. We also examine the burden on a movant to establish that evidence would certainly not be admissible at trial in order to exclude it at summary judgment.

Read More

Indiana: Who Can Bring Claim for Death of Child When Both Parents Also Die?

Indiana: Who Can Bring Claim for Death of Child When Both Parents Also Die?

In this post, we discuss Parsley v. MGA Family Group, Inc., which held that a grandmother as de facto guardian was not able to pursue a child wrongful death claim for the death of her grandson. After questioning whether the Indiana Court of Appeals reached the right decision, we examine what the procedure is in general to pursue a claim when a child’s custodian is killed alongside the child.

Read More

Indiana: What to Do When Discovering After the Statute of Limitations Expires That the Wrong Party Was Named?

Indiana: What to Do When Discovering After the Statute of Limitations Expires That the Wrong Party Was Named?

This week we look at the decision in Webb v. City of Carmel and look to use of Trial Rule 15(C) for adding a new party after the statute of limitations has expired. We also discuss whether the court of appeals misapplied Indiana’s summary judgment standard in this case, wherein there is no mention whatsoever of the movants’ evidence, only a determination that the non-movant’s evidence was insufficient.

Read More

Did the Indiana Court of Appeals Just Rewrite Trial Rule 75(A)?

Did the Indiana Court of Appeals Just Rewrite Trial Rule 75(A)?

This week, we look at a recent decision from the Indiana Court of Appeals that looks to have established a new, non-textual standard for determining preferred venue in Indiana. In so doing, the opinion looks to have manifested the concerns of Justices Dickson and Rucker in their dissenting opinion to R & D Transport, Inc. v. A.H.

Read More

When Does a Proprietor Owe a Duty to Stop One Patron from Shooting Another? Indiana Court of Appeals Weighs In

When Does a Proprietor Owe a Duty to Stop One Patron from Shooting Another? Indiana Court of Appeals Weighs In

This week we look at the remarkable decision in Hamilton v. Steak'n Shake Operations Inc., which took a deep dive into the analyses of Goodwin v. Yeakle's Sports Bar & Grill and Rogers v. Martin to conclude that a restaurant proprietor owes a duty to take reasonable precautions to protect a "restaurant patron who has been subjected to escalating threats and taunts" from "injury resulting after the encounter culminated in physical violence."

Read More

Indiana Court of Appeals: Failure to Respond to Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment Not Necessarily Fatal

Indiana Court of Appeals: Failure to Respond to Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment Not Necessarily Fatal

This week we discuss an interesting circumstance of whether failure to file a response to a cross-motion for summary judgment prohibits reliance upon evidence filed in the initial motion for summary judgment.

Read More