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. Oh my lordy Therapist Oniha of the winexbackspell@gmail.com I GOT Briggs BACK. Im so excited, It only took 2days for him to come home. bless divinity and bless god. i must be dreaming as i never thoughts he would be back to me after all this time. I am so much shock and just cant believe my eyes. thank you thank you thank you from the bottom of my heart,he always kiss and hug me now at all times,am so happy my heart is back to me with your help Therapist Oniha.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT