Indiana Supreme Court to hear three oral arguments April 25 

  • 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
(Photo courtesy of Indiana Supreme Court)

The Indiana Supreme Court will hear three oral arguments on April 25, including one involving a Fort Wayne firefighter’s complaint against an electric scooter company.

The first argument is Richard Dolsen, Jr. v. VeoRide, Inc., Sweet Real Estate – City Center, LLC, No. 23A-CT-00945 at 9 a.m. 

Richard Dolsen Jr. sued VeoRide, Inc. and Sweet Real Estate for the injuries he received while battling a fire at the defendants’ property.  

According to court documents, the smoke and lack of light made it difficult for Dolsen Jr. to see where he was going during the fire. As he was feeling walls to walk, he fell through an opening in a wall and down into a stairwell.

The Allen Superior Court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgement, stating the Indiana Firefighter’s Rule bars recovery.  

The Court of Appeals reversed the superior court’s ruling, finding genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment.  

The second argument is Mathew J. Cramer, II v. State of Indiana, No. 23S-LW-00019 at 11 a.m. 

In November 2022, a jury convicted Mathew Cramer of murder, resisting law enforcement and abuse of a corpse for his role in the 2021 death of Shane Nguyen.  

The defense account claimed Cramer killed Nguyen in an act of panic, and that he was the victim of a sexual predator.

The state sought a life sentence without parole for the dismemberment charge. 

The jury recommended the life without parole sentence for the murder charge. The Allen County Superior Court chose LWOP accordingly

Also, the high court will hear arguments for Jeffrey L. Foster, Kathie J. Foster, and the Earl Goodwine Trust v. First Merchants Bank, N.A., 

According to the court, after the Fosters’ lawsuit had been pending for more than a decade, First Merchants Bank moved to dismiss, arguing the Fosters failed to actively prosecute the case.

The Benton Circuit Court agreed and dismissed the case under Indiana Trial Rule 41(E).

The appellate court found dismissal inappropriate under Rule 41(E) but affirmed dismissal under the doctrine of laches in Foster v. First Merchants Bank, N.A., 217 N.E.3d 1248 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023), vacated.

The Indiana Supreme Court has granted the Fosters’ petition to transfer and assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.

All three oral arguments will be held inside the Supreme Court Courtroom at the Indiana Statehouse.  

The arguments will be streamed online.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated. 

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 }}