IN Supreme Court to hear two oral arguments next week

  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00
The Indiana Supreme Court bench. (IL file photo)

The Indiana Supreme Court will be hearing two oral arguments next week in cases involving a woman injured in a swimming pool accident and an arbitration dispute involving more than 30 models and an insurance provider for three strip clubs.

The first argument will be held at 9 a.m. Tuesday in the Supreme Court Courtroom at the Statehouse.

The case – Jennifer Pennington and Joshua Pennington v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend Inc. d/b/a Beacon Health and Fitness, 23S-CT-00182 – was affirmed by the Court of Appeals of Indiana after it found that a trial court did not abuse its discretion in striking a portion of deposition testimony or in making evidentiary rulings.

The appellate court ruled that Beacon Health and Fitness failed to demonstrate it had no duty to Jennifer Pennington under the circumstances.

Pennington sued Beacon after sustaining a head injury while swimming in its pool. She claimed several negligence theories along with premises liability.

The St. Joseph Superior Court denied Beacon’s motion for summary judgment on the premises liability claim.

The high court granted transfer in the case.

The second case the high court will hear for oral arguments will start at 10 a.m. Tuesday.

Illinois Casualty Company v. B&S of Fort Wayne Inc., et al., 23S-PL-00180, was reversed by the lower appellate court in January when it found the models’ claims did not fall under the arbitration provision.

After a federal lawsuit was filed, 33 models and three strip clubs entered into a settlement agreement in which the clubs assigned their rights against their insurance provider, Illinois Casualty Company, to the models.

The company had filed a declaratory judgment action claiming the policies they issued to the clubs do not cover the models’ claims.

The models then moved for arbitration, and the Allen Superior Court granted the motion, finding a valid arbitration agreement.

Both oral arguments will be live streamed online.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}