TP Orthodontics, Inc. v. Andrew Kesling, et al. - 8/6/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Tuesday  August 6, 2013 
1:30 PM  EST

1:30 p.m.  46A03-1207-MI-324. In 2010, the board of directors of TP Orthodontics, Inc. established a special litigation committee to determine whether to pursue a number of derivative claims brought by the Appellees.  After a year-long investigation, the committee issued a written report in which it recommended pursuing some claims of the Appellees’ claims, but not others.  TPO filed a motion to dismiss the rejected claims and attached a heavily redacted copy of the report.  The Appellees demanded access to the un-redacted report, but TPO resisted.  The trial court ultimately ordered TPO to produce the un-redacted report.  This interlocutory appeal followed.
TPO argues that there is no statutory basis for requiring it to produce the report, citing Indiana Code section 23-1-32-4.  The corporation also contends that allowing the Appellees access to the full report would violate the business-judgment rule and raise attorney-client privilege and work-product issues.  The Appellees claim that they cannot respond to TPO’s summary-judgment motion or challenge the committee’s determination without the full report.

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. Based on several recent Indy Star articles, I would agree that being a case worker would be really hard. You would see the worst of humanity on a daily basis; and when things go wrong guess who gets blamed??!! Not biological parent!! Best of luck to those who entered that line of work.

  2. I was looking through some of your blog posts on this internet site and I conceive this web site is rattling informative ! Keep on posting . dfkcfdkdgbekdffe

  3. Don't believe me, listen to Pacino: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6bC9w9cH-M

  4. Law school is social control the goal to produce a social product. As such it began after the Revolution and has nearly ruined us to this day: "“Scarcely any political question arises in the United States which is not resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question. Hence all parties are obliged to borrow, in their daily controversies, the ideas, and even the language, peculiar to judicial proceedings. As most public men [i.e., politicians] are, or have been, legal practitioners, they introduce the customs and technicalities of their profession into the management of public affairs. The jury extends this habitude to all classes. The language of the law thus becomes, in some measure, a vulgar tongue; the spirit of the law, which is produced in the schools and courts of justice, gradually penetrates beyond their walls into the bosom of society, where it descends to the lowest classes, so that at last the whole people contract the habits and the tastes of the judicial magistrate.” ? Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

  5. Attorney? Really? Or is it former attorney? Status with the Ind St Ct? Status with federal court, with SCOTUS? This is a legal newspaper, or should I look elsewhere?

ADVERTISEMENT