ILNews

Products Liability/Negligence

July 19, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Trial Report

Jonathan M. Hinsey v.  Better Built Dry Kilns, Inc. and DeNardi, s.r.l., a/k/a Nardi Group and Nardi Partecipazioni, s.r.l.

U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, No. 1:08-CV-0114

Injuries: Third-degree burns over 40 percent of body

Date: to be tried in 2010

Disposition: Settled for policy limits of $1 million prior to mediation

Plaintiff Attorney: Cory Brundage, Cory Brundage LLC, Indianapolis

Defendant Attorney: Matthew Shipman, Bloom Gates Sigler & Whiteleather, Columbia City

Insurance: American Resources Insurance Co.,

Case Information: Plaintiff fell into a pit of superheated water built into the floor of a lumber steamer, sustaining burns to his feet, legs, abdomen, and arms.
The steamer was manufactured by Nardi, an Italian manufacturer and sold to plaintiff’s employer by Better Dry Kilns, which assisted in the construction. Service could not be obtained on the Italian company, which had gone bankrupt, making Better Built liable as the manufacturer under Indiana’s products liability statute.

Strategic challenges included potential fault allocations against Nardi, the plaintiff’s employer, and the plaintiff, all of which would be uncollectible and an enormous workmen’s compensation lien for disability and medical payments. Ultimately, Better Built’s carrier paid plaintiff’s policy limits demand of $1 million, and the lien holder accepted a drastic reduction to 16 percent of its total lien. Defendant’s attorney Matthew Shipman was professional in his handling of the matter and cooperated with plaintiff’s attorney to create a structured settlement that will pay benefits to the plaintiff for life.
Cory Brundage

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT