A medical expert does not need to expressly state the applicable standard of care in his affidavit, it can be inferred from substantively sufficient information.
Civil
Zaragoza v. Wexford of Ind., LLC, No. 23S-CT-99, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 25, 2024).
The trial court should not have granted summary judgment. An inmate must rely on prison authorities for their medical needs. If they aren’t meeting those needs, the courts must not prematurely close their doors to a potentially meritorious claim.
Freed v. Freed, No. 23A-DC-129, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 26, 2024).
The Court adopts a balancing approach to resolve the custody of frozen pre-embryos that looks at: (1) the intended use of the pre-embryos by the party seeking to preserve them; (2) the reasonable ability of the party seeking implantation to have children through other means; (3) the parties’ original reasons for undergoing IVF, which may favor preservation over disposition; (4) the potential burden on the party seeking to avoid becoming a genetic parent; (5) either party’s bad faith attempt to use the pre-embryos as leverage in the dissolution proceeding; and (6) other considerations relevant to the parties’ unique situation.
Pennington v. Memorial Hosp. of South Bend, Inc., No. 23S-CT-182, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 9, 2024).
The test for civil liability for conditions on the land looks at whether the danger posed by the specific condition involved was foreseeable, but the test for activities on the land looks at whether it was foreseeable that a general class of persons to which the plaintiff belonged might suffer the general type of harm involved.
Expert Pool Builders, LLC v. Vangundy, No. 23S‐PL‐171, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 2, 2024).
A party’s opposition to the motion for default judgment preserved its challenge for appeal and it was not required to also file a T.R. 60(B) motion.