9:00 a.m.     Wayne A. and Helen Peters v. Donald Forster

A visitor fell on a ramped walkway leading up to a house, and sued the contractor who had installed the ramp several months earlier. In the visitor’s suit against the contractor, the Knox Superior Court entered summary judgment for the contractor. The Court of Appeals reversed on grounds the contractor owed a duty to the visitor even after the contractor’s work had been accepted. Peters v. Forster, 770 N.E.2d 414 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). The contractor has petitioned the Supreme Court to assume jurisdiction over the case.

                    Attorney for Peters
                    Lane C. Siesky
                    Evansville, IN

                    Attorney for Forster
                    Daniel Siewers
                    Vincennes, IN

Thursday, January 16, 2003

9:45 a.m.     Paragon Family Restaurant v. Mario Bartolini, Jr.

A bar patron sued a bar and its owner for injuries he sustained when attacked by two other patrons, one of whom was underage. The Lake Superior Court entered judgment on a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The Court of Appeals held that the defendants could be held liable but remanded for a new trial, concluding that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury’s allocation of 80 percent fault to the defendants. See Paragon Family Restaurant v. Bartolini, 769 N.E.2d 609 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). The Supreme Court has granted transfer, vacating the opinion of Court of Appeals, and has assumed jurisdiction over this appeal.

                    Attorneys for Paragon
                    Thomas A. Carton
                    Munster, IN

                    James R. Branit
                    Chicago, IL.

                    Attorneys for Bartolini
                    George T. Patton, Jr.
                    Carrie L. Wagner
                    Indianapolis, IN

                    Barry D. Sherman
                    Kristen D. Hill
                    Hammond, IN

Wednesday, January 22, 2003

9:45 a.m.     Re: Estate of Michael K. Young v. Tri-Etch, Inc

The estate of a liquor store employee killed during a robbery filed a wrongful death claim against the alarm company used by the store. The Delaware Circuit Court granted the alarm company summary judgment after concluding that the estate’s claim was time-barred by a provision in the contract between the store and the alarm company requiring that any action be filed within one year. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Young v. Tri-Etch, Inc., 767 N.E.2d 1029 (Ind. Ct. App.), affirmed on rehearing, 773 N.E.2d 298 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). The Supreme Court has granted transfer, vacating the Court of Appeals’ opinion, and has assumed jurisdiction over this appeal.


            Attorneys for Young
                James R. Fisher
                Debra H. Miller
                Indianapolis, IN     
        
                Attorney for Tri-Etch
                Andrew P. Wirick
                Indianapolis, IN