The Estate of Richard A. Mayer and Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C., v. Lax, Inc., and David Lasco - 5/28/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Tuesday  May 28, 2013 
1:30 PM  EST

1:30 p.m. 37A03-1207-PL-323. Lax, Inc. and David Lasco sued attorney Richard Mayer and his firm, Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C. (“SJD”), for defamation, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, tortious interference with a business relationship, and tortious interference with a contract, based on written statements made by Mayer in previous litigation; Lax and Lasco also sought punitive damages.  After the lawsuit was initiated, Mayer died.  Mayer’s estate and SJD subsequently moved for summary judgment.  The trial court granted summary judgment to Mayer’s estate on the defamation and malicious prosecution claims but allowed those claims to proceed against SJD.  It also allowed the abuse of process and tortious interference claims to proceed against the estate and SJD and allowed Lax and Lasco to continue seeking punitive damages.  On appeal, SJD claims the malicious prosecution and defamation claims cannot proceed against it because of Mayer’s death.  Both the estate and SJD also contend that the statements made by Mayer in the previous litigation were absolutely privileged, that there are no issues of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the abuse of process and tortious interference claims, and that Lax and Lasco cannot recover punitive damages on any claims.

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. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT