March 5, 2026

Indiana Court of Appeals
Folabi Oshinubi, Denzel Lewis and Clarence White v. Reiling Teder & Schrier, LLC
No. 25A-CT-940

Civil. Appeal from the Tippecanoe Circuit Court, Judge Sean M. Persin. Judge Mathias writes that the court affirms the trial court’s entry of summary judgment for Reiling Teder & Schrier, LLC on the tenants’ claims under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, or FDCPA. Holds the law firm established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by designating evidence that it acted in good-faith reliance on the landlord’s representations that he had sent the tenants the required statutory 45-day notice itemizing damages before attempting to collect repair costs. Further holds that once the firm made that showing, the burden shifted to the tenants to designate evidence or legal authority demonstrating a genuine issue of material fact, which they failed to do after not responding to the summary-judgment motion and failing to address the firm’s good-faith theory on appeal. Concludes the tenants did not demonstrate that the firm’s actions violated the FDCPA and therefore the trial court properly entered summary judgment for the firm. May and Felix concur. Appellants’ attorney: Duran L. Keller. Appellee’s attorneys: Crystal G. Rowe; Jacob W. Zigenfus; Nicholas W. Levi.

The following opinion was issued on March 4 after The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline. 

Indiana Supreme Court
Shantel Waggoner, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Elmer Gordon Waggoner v. Anonymous Health System, Inc., et al.
No. 26S-CT-71

Civil. Appeal from the Vanderburgh Superior Court, Judge Leslie C. Shively, on petition to transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals. Justice Goff writes that the court affirms the trial court’s entry of summary judgment for the healthcare providers and holds the trial court may make a preliminary determination on statutory immunity without first obtaining an expert opinion from a medical-review panel. Holds that because the providers asserted immunity as an affirmative defense — which assumes negligence but denies liability — the court could resolve the threshold legal issue without expert testimony on medical causation. Further holds the providers are immune from civil liability under the Indiana Healthcare Immunity Act and the Premises Immunity Act because the patient’s injuries arose from treatment provided in response to the COVID-19 emergency, including extended immobilization and use of a ventilator. Also holds the providers are independently immune under the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act because the patient’s injuries arose from the administration of a covered countermeasure — a ventilator used to treat COVID-19 — during a declared public-health emergency. Concludes the estate failed to designate evidence of gross negligence or willful misconduct sufficient to overcome statutory immunity and that the trial court properly granted summary judgment. Rush, Massa, Slaughter and Molter concur. Appellant’s attorney: Arie J. Lipinski. Appellees’ attorneys: Katherine M. Haire; Trenton W. Gill; Ryan T. Wood; Kyle L. Childress; David S. Strite; Nicholas J. Davis; Colleen O. Davis; Allyson R. Breeden; Alyssa F. Ricker; Margaret M. Christensen; Moncerrat Z. Alvarez; Patrick P. Devine; Sam S. Zabaneh; Mark E. Hammond; Morgan N. Blind; Jon M. Pinnick.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.