“’[M]ailing’ for purposes of the Indiana Trial Rules requires the sender to affix sufficient postage.”
Civil
Gagan v. Yast, No. 45A05-1107-CT-377, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 5, 2012).
Attorney’s alleged defamatory statements made against his former clients were protected on the grounds of qualified privilege.
Myers v. Coats, No. 49A04-1104-PL-20, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., March 29, 2012).
Plaintiff had a liberty interest in not being mistakenly labeled as a sex offender and the process to challenge such erroneous listing was inadequate, however, there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether a DOC employee personally deprived plaintiff of a constitutional right.
Santelli v. Rahmatullah, No. 49A04-1011-CT-70, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., March 29, 2012).
Adopts adopt Restatement (Third) of Torts § 14, “Tortfeasor Liable For Failure To Protect The Plaintiff From The Specific Risk Of An Intentional Tort.”
Lakes v. Grange Mutual Casualty Co., No. 89S05-1109-CT-53, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., March 20, 2012).
The tortfeasor’s vehicle was underinsured because the amount actually paid to the plaintiff was less than the per-person limit of liability of the underinsurance endorsement.