ILNews

Arguments Thursday in infant sleeping death

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear arguments tomorrow in a negligence suit filed by parents after their infant died while sleeping on a couch with his mother.

In Alisha Harradon and William Kenneth Jones Jr. v. Kathy and Keith Schlamadinger, No. 75A03-0903-CV-114, parents Alisha Harradon and William Jones Jr. allege the Schlamadingers' negligence proximately caused the death of their 3-month-old son.

Harradon and Jones were staying overnight at the Schlamadingers' home; Harradon slept on the couch with the infant, who suffocated and died. The parents claim the Schlamadingers didn't provide an adequate place for the baby to sleep.

The trial court granted summary judgment for the Schlamadingers. The parents argue on appeal the couple owed a duty to their son and there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Schlamadingers breached that duty.

Judges James Kirsch, Paul Mathias, and Patricia Riley will hear the arguments scheduled for 11 a.m. Thursday in the Indiana Court of Appeals courtroom. The arguments will be webcast on the COA's Web site.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT