The Pfenning standard is applicable in the case of a mother hit in the knee by a youth baseball team member warming up, and to apply the Pfenning standard the Court must examine the actions of the alleged tortfeasor to determine if “the conduct of [the] participant” is within the “range of ordinary behavior of participants in the sport.”
Appeals
Randolph v. Buss, No. 33A04-1010-MI-684, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2011).
Legislature intended that inmate’s left-over educational credit time after his release on parole would not still be available to him when his parole was revoked and he returned to prison.
Lock v. State, No. 35A04-1010-CR-641, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2011).
Evidence defendant’s motorcycle was going 43 miles per hour did not prove its “maximum design speed” was 25 miles per hour or more, a “design speed” the State had to prove in order to show defendant was operating a “motor vehicle” rather than a “motorized bicycle” so that defendant was guilty of driving while suspended.
Lechien v. Wren, No. 48A02-1007-DR-882, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2011).
“[R]epudiation is not a release of a parent’s financial responsibility for the payment of child support and is not an acceptable justification to abate support payments for a child less than twenty-one years of age.”
Johnson, et al v. Sullivan et al, No. 82A05-1102-MI-108, ___ N.E.2d ____ (Ind. Ct. App. July 27, 2011).
“[E]vidence of mailing on a particular date, even if it contradicts a postmark, is competent to prove filing on that date for purposes of the Medical Malpractice Act.”