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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT