ILNews

COA in Carmel to hear appeal of sanctions

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals visits Carmel High School Thursday to hear arguments in a case stemming from a propane gas explosion.

Chief Judge John G. Baker and Judges Ezra Friedlander and Terry Crone will hear arguments in White-Rodgers, et al. v. Lonnie Kindle, et al., No. 55A05-0906-CV-308, at 10 a.m. in the auditorium of the high school, 520 E. Main St., Carmel.

White-Rodgers and other defendants are appealing the trial court's imposition of more than $18,000 in sanctions for alleged discovery noncompliance, as well as the merits of the underlying discovery orders preceding the sanction award.

White-Rodgers and others were sued by Lonnie Kindle and others who were involved in the 2004 explosion at an apartment in Morgan County. The plaintiffs' complaints were for strict products liability and negligent design of a water heater control because they believed there was a defect in the gas control valve on the water heater.

The sanctions stem from White-Rodgers' noncompliance in producing materials from a Missouri case against the company involving a propane gas explosion and a water heater with a White-Rodgers gas control valve.

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT