Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowThe following opinion was published after IL’s deadline Tuesday:
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Charles Hess, et. al. v. Biomet, Inc. and Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.
23-1555, 23-1556
Civil. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division. Chief Judge Jon DeGuilio. Affirms the district court’s partial dismissal of Charles Hess’s complaint and affirms the denials of Biomet Inc.’s motions for summary judgment and judgment as a matter of law. Finds the district court was right to dismiss the two counts in the distributors’ complaint. Also finds It also correctly determined that the distributorship agreement was ambiguous regarding the particular categories of products it covered.
Wednesday opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals
Christopher Lewis Laux v. Maureen Baker, Daria Walpole, Giles Laux, Terry Laux, Teresa Laux, Amy Laux, Nicole Sholly
23A-CT-2620
Civil tort. Affirms the St. Joseph Superior Court’s granting of Maureen Baker and other defendants’ motion to dismiss under Trial Rule 12(B)(6), with their argument being that Christopher Laux did not satisfy the heightened pleading standard for defamation and otherwise did not state a viable claim. Finds Laux failed to adequately state his claims of defamation, tortious interference with a business relationship, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and entitlement to punitive damages.
NFI Interactive Logistics LLC and D’Andre Terry v. James Bruski and Dawn Bruski
23A-CT-1969
Civil tort. Affirms the Porter Superior Court’s denial of D’Andre Terry and NFI Interactive Logistics LLC’s Trial Rule 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss and remands for further proceedings. Finds that James and Dawn Bruski stated a viable claim of negligence per se premised on the violation of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. Also finds that the complaint states a viable theory of liability to the extent that Terry’s collision with the disabled vehicle—even if Terry was not negligent in that collision—can be said to have increased the hazard on the road. Finally, finds that the complaint states a viable claim of negligence per se based on the violation of a federal regulation applicable to those who operate commercial vehicles.
Shauntelle Esposito v. Barry Eppley, M.D., Dawn Fox, M.A., and Eppley Plastic Surgery P.C.
23A-CT-1488
Civil tort. Reverses the Hamilton Superior Court’s granting of summary judgment to Barry Eppley and Eppley Plastic Surgery, P.C., but affirms the court’s granting of summary judgment to Dawn Fox. Finds the trial court abused its discretion in excluding Dr. Steven Burres’s expert affidavit and in denying Shuantelle Esposito’s motion to withdraw admissions. Also finds that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Eppley and Eppley Plastic Surgery, P.C. were negligent in the care of Esposito, and that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of those two parties.
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of A.P. v. Community Health Network, Inc.
24A-MH-218
Mental health. Affirms the Hamilton Superior Court’s order of involuntary regular commitment for A.P. Finds there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s order of involuntary regular commitment, which concluded that A.P. was gravely disabled and dangerous because of his mental illness.
Cherelle Taylor v. State of Indiana
23A-CR-2898
Criminal. Affirms Cherelle Taylor’s conviction in Marion Superior Court of felony battery against her 12-year-old-son, A.W., after beating, biting, choking, and generally attacking him until he was almost unconscious. Finds the state statute defining battery against a child under 14 was not unconstitutionally vague as applied in the case.
T’arel Jordan Justice v. State of Indiana
23A-CR-2592
Criminal. Reverses T’arel Justice’s conviction in Marion Superior Court for aggravated battery and remands for a new trial. Additionally, remands with instructions that the sentencing order and abstract of judgment be corrected to indicate that Justice’s conviction for resisting law enforcement was vacated. Finds the trial court misapplied the burden of proof for Justice’s claims of self defense and defense of a third party.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.