ILNews

Justices to hear negligent design case

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court took three cases last week, including a lawsuit filed by a man rendered a quadriplegic after he fell out of a company truck while working for Richmond Power.

Anthony Wade sued Terex-Telelect Inc., claiming the double-man bucket attached to the company truck was negligently designed under the Indiana Products Liability Act. The jury allocated 100 percent fault to Wade for his fall out of the bucket. A split Court of Appeals believed Wade was prejudiced by the jury instruction as to rebuttable presumption because it was unsupported by relevant evidence, and the appellate court ordered a new trial.

The case is Anthony Wade v. Terex-Telect Inc., 29S05-1209-CT-557.

The justices took two other cases on transfer – In Re: The Visitation of M.L.B., K.J.R. v. M.A.B., 41S01-1209-MI-556; and In Re: Prosecutor’s Subpoena Regarding S.H. and S.C., S.H. v. State of Indiana, 73S01-1209-CR-563.

The Court of Appeals in M.L.B. affirmed in a not-for-publication decision the order granting grandfather M.A.B.’s petition for visitation rights as to M.L.B. Mother K.J.R. argued that the order exceeded the limitations of the Indiana Grandparent Visitation Act, among other arguments.

In S.H., the Court of Appeals relied on Indiana Supreme Court precedent to find a Shelby County prosecutor could compel parents to testify by proving use immunity. Parents S.H. and S.C. argued the prosecutor couldn’t grant use immunity because there were no grand jury proceedings and they hadn’t been charged with a crime.

The prosecutor sought to compel the parents’ testimony about the circumstances surrounding the birth of their child in 2010, as the baby showed signs of injury when the baby and mother went to the hospital after the home birth.

The justices denied transfer to 21 cases, including three appeals filed by Delmas Sexton II, who is serving a 65-year sentence for the felony murder of an Allen County man.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A sad end to a prolific gadfly. Indiana has suffered a great loss in the journalistic realm.

  2. Good riddance to this dangerous activist judge

  3. What is the one thing the Hoosier legal status quo hates more than a whistleblower? A lawyer whistleblower taking on the system man to man. That must never be rewarded, must always, always, always be punished, lest the whole rotten tree be felled.

  4. I want to post this to keep this tread alive and hope more of David's former clients might come forward. In my case, this coward of a man represented me from June 2014 for a couple of months before I fired him. I knew something was wrong when he blatantly lied about what he had advised me in my contentious and unfortunate divorce trial. His impact on the proceedings cast a very long shadow and continues to impact me after a lengthy 19 month divorce. I would join a class action suit.

  5. The dispute in LB Indiana regarding lake front property rights is typical of most beach communities along our Great Lakes. Simply put, communication to non owners when visiting the lakefront would be beneficial. The Great Lakes are designated navigational waters (including shorelines). The high-water mark signifies the area one is able to navigate. This means you can walk, run, skip, etc. along the shores. You can't however loiter, camp, sunbath in front of someones property. Informational signs may be helpful to owners and visitors. Our Great Lakes are a treasure that should be enjoyed by all. PS We should all be concerned that the Long Beach, Indiana community is on septic systems.

ADVERTISEMENT