“In a negligence action, whether a duty exists is a question of law for the court to decide. And in those instances where foreseeability is an element of duty, this necessarily means the court must determine the question of foreseeability as a matter of law. “
Civil
Patchett v. Lee, Inc., No. 49S02-1610-PL-532, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 21, 2016).
“[T]he rationale of Stanley v. Walker applies equally to reimbursements by government payers… The reduced amount is thus a probative, relevant measure of the reasonable value of the plaintiff’s medical care that the factfinder should consider.”
Davis v. Phelps, No. 03A01-1604-PL-928, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 17, 2016).
At the least, the trial court must give an inmate forty-five days to pay the partial filing fee.
Adams v. ArvinMeritor, Inc., No. 49S02-1610-PL-532, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 12, 2016).
Inmates had no private right of action to pursue wage claims against a privately owned company where they worked while inmates in the Indiana Department of Correction.
McKeen v. Turner, No. 53A05-1511-CT-2047, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2016).
“[A] plaintiff may raise any theories of alleged malpractice during litigation following the [Medical Review Panel] process if (1) the proposed complaint encompasses the theories, and (2) the evidence related to those theories was before the [Medical Review Panel].”