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 Supreme Court: Evidence of Prior Alcohol Convictions Are Admissible to Support Punitive Damages Claim

Indiana Supreme Court: Evidence of Prior Alcohol Convictions Are Admissible to Support Punitive Damages Claim

This week we look at the final decision from long-serving Indiana Supreme Court Justice Robert Rucker, which held that evidence of prior alcohol convictions are admissible in a drunk driving case to support a claim of punitive damages. We also look briefly at two other decisions this week from the Court of Appeals of Indiana. One of those decisions held that an expert in a medical malpractice case who testifies on the applicable standard of care may be cross-examined on his personal practices. The other examined the scope of the duty to warn and affirmed a jury verdict for a passenger injured when the vehicle she was in struck a semi on the side of the road, despite the driver of the car dying and being unable to testify whether he would have taken different actions had the truck driver turned on his emergency flashers.

Read More

Indiana Supreme Court Answers Issue of First Impression on Attorney Fees Under Medical Malpractice Act

Indiana Supreme Court Answers Issue of First Impression on Attorney Fees Under Medical Malpractice Act

Today's discussion examines a case of first impression in the Indiana Supreme Court that reversed the court of appeals decision. The court addressed whether a statutory cap on attorney fee recovery from a client in medical malpractice cases could apply to limit liability for attorney fees under the wrongful death statute in medical malpractice cases.

Read More

Indiana Supreme Court Examines Ability to Use Third-Party Carrier to File Medical Malpractice Case

Indiana Supreme Court Examines Ability to Use Third-Party Carrier to File Medical Malpractice Case

Today we revisit a prior discussion of the case Moryl v. Ransone which progressed to the Indiana Supreme Court and answers the question of whether, despite the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act not listing a third-party carrier as an accepted method for filing a malpractice complaint that would toll the statute of limitations, a medical malpractice plaintiff could file a complaint using FedEx.

Read More

Indiana Court Provides Guidance on Breadth of Medical Malpractice Act

Indiana Court Provides Guidance on Breadth of Medical Malpractice Act

This week's discussion focuses on the question of what cases are governed by the Medical Malpractice Act. The answer is not always as easy as you might think and the Indiana Court of Appeals case B.R. v. State of Indiana provides a great example along with a discussion of how the line is drawn.

Read More

Indiana Supreme Court Weighs In on Medical Malpractice Filing Deadline

Indiana Supreme Court Weighs In on Medical Malpractice Filing Deadline

This week we talk about the Indiana Supreme Court decision Miller v. Dobbs that held for purposes of the statute of limitations, that a medical malpractice action is filed with the Department of Insurance when the complaint is filed regardless of when the filing and service fees are paid. This post also goes into great depth to analyze what this decision shows us about the current composition of the Indiana Supreme Court and takes a look at the possible impact of this case upon Moryl v. Ransome with rehearing still pending before the Indiana Court of Appeals.

Read More

Indiana Medical Malpractice Filing Using Third-Party Carrier

Indiana Medical Malpractice Filing Using Third-Party Carrier

In this installment we discuss the recent Indiana Court of Appeals decision Moryl v. Ransone, which addresses the impact on the statute of limitations of filing a medical malpractice claim with the Indiana Department of Insurance using a third-party carrier.

Read More