The trial court has the authority to determine and order parenting time for a parent whose child is placed with a guardian.
Civil
Kirchgessner v. Kirchgessner, No10A01-1710-CP-2309,__ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 29, 2018).
Trial court properly granted a T.R. 60(B)(7) motion within a reasonable time, even though it was over 25 years since the judgment was entered.
Certa v. Steak’n Shake Operations, Inc., No. 79A05-1708-CT-1873,__ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 29, 2018).
Using the Rogers/Goodwin analysis, restaurant had a duty to protect restaurant patron from injury caused by another patron when the restaurant knew that the patrons had engaged in a verbal altercation and was aware of the potential for escalation of the conflict.
Henderson v. Kleinman, No. 84A01-1710-CT-2566,__ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 30, 2018).
There is no statutory duty for a doctor to maintain adequate records; the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of doctor when “lack of documentation makes it impossible for the panel to decide whether the evidence supports or does not support a conclusion that the Defendant failed to comply with the appropriate standard of care in his treatment of the Plaintiff.”
Parsley v. MGA Family Group, Inc., No. 19A01-1707-CT-1535,__ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 16, 2018).
Grandmother, alleged de facto guardian of her grandson, could not bring an action on behalf of her grandson under the Child Wrongful Death Statute because she was not his legal guardian.