Paul Komyatti, Jr. v. The Consolidated City of Indianapolis-Marion County and Citizens Energy Group -3/18/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Thursday  April 25, 2013 
11:00 AM  EST

11 a.m. 49A04-1209-CT-445. In June 2010, Paul Komyatti rode his bicycle to an Indianapolis bar, drank some beers, and started biking home.  As Komyatti was biking at least twenty miles per hour on the left side of the street under a railroad bridge, his front wheel struck a water-filled pothole.  Komyatti fell off his bike and was injured.  He was taken to the hospital, where his blood alcohol concentration was measured at .137, which exceeds the .08 legal limit for operating a vehicle.  Komyatti filed suit against the City of Indianapolis and Citizens Energy Group.  He alleged that the City was negligent in maintaining the street and that Citizens was negligent in allowing coke to clog the storm drains under the railroad bridge, which allegedly contributed to the pothole.  The City moved for summary judgment on the basis that Komyatti was contributorily negligent, which is a complete bar to recovery in tort claims against governmental entities.  Citizens also moved for summary judgment, asserting that it did not create a dangerous condition, had no duty to maintain the street, and did not proximately cause Komyatti’s injuries.  The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of both the City and Citizens. Komyatti now appeals.

Back to Events
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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT