An attorney who is disqualified from representing client in one matter is not automatically disqualified from representing client in another matter if the basis for disqualification no longer exists.
Civil
Ceres Solutions Coop., Inc. v. Estate of Bradley, No. 21A-CT-377, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 12, 2022).
For the bystander rule for negligent infliction of emotional distress, explosion and subsequent fire are not separate injury-producing events for purposes of the temporal factor. Also, the plaintiff did not need to see the body of his wife being removed from the exploded house when he possessed a reasonable degree of certainty that she had been in the house at the time of the explosion.
WTHR-TV v. Hamilton Se. Sch. Dist., No. 21S-MI-345, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 13, 2022).
Ind. Code § 5-14-3-4(b)(8) requires public agencies to provide certain types of information, but it does not require them to provide the underlying documents.
Ind. Repertory Theatre, No. 21A-PL-628, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 4, 2022).
Insurance policy language “direct physical loss or direct physical damage” did not encompass theatre’s claim for loss of use of its facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic
K.G. v. Smith, No. 21S-CT-561, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 22, 2021).
When a caretaker assumes responsibility for a child, and when that caretaker owes a duty of care to the child’s parent or guardian, a claim against the caretaker for the negligent infliction of emotional distress may proceed when the parent or guardian later discovers, with irrefutable certainty, that the caretaker sexually abused that child and when that abuse severely impacted the parent or guardian’s emotional health.