Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 2017–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
ONB Insurance Group, Inc., d/b/a Old National Insurance, and Joseph E. Kenworthy v. The Estate of Joann Marie Megel, the Estate of Edward J. Megel, Darcy Megelgreen2 sentences2020Public Policy [19] “The final factor in the Goodwin test is the public policy consideration of who is, or should be, in the best position to prevent injury and how society should allocate the costs of such injury.” ONB, 107 N.E.3d at 494 (internal quotation omitted). 2020Public Policy [19] “The final factor in the Goodwin test is the public policy consideration of who is, or should be, in the best position to prevent injury and how society should allocate the costs of such injury.” ONB, 107 N.E.3d at 494 (internal quotation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
April Goodwin, Tiffany Randolph and Javon Washington v. Yeakle's Sports Bar and Grill, Inc.
green
2 sentences2020Again, “[a]bsent a duty there can be no negligence or liability based upon the breach.” Goodwin, 62 N.E.3d at 386 . 2020Again, “[a]bsent a duty there can be no negligence or liability based upon the breach.” Goodwin, 62 N.E.3d at 386 . | 2 | 2019–2020 |
Anthony Rose v. Martin's Super Markets L.L.C., Martin's Super Markets of Elkhart East L.L.C., Martin's Super Markets of Elkhart L.L.C., and Martin's Super Markets Inc.
green
2 sentences2025Id. at 242 . 2025Id. at 242 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Jeffery Certa v. Steak 'n Shake Operations, Inc., Mikal Gillham, and Matthew Hulett
green
2 sentences2019In Certa v. Steak 'n Shake Operations, Inc. , 102 N.E.3d 336 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018), trans. denied , two groups of people butted heads outside a Steak 'n Shake restaurant, continued being antagonistic to each other inside the restaurant, and ultimately came to blows outside the restaurant, resulting in one person being run over by a car. 2019In Certa v. Steak 'n Shake Operations, Inc. , 102 N.E.3d 336 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018), trans. denied , two groups of people butted heads outside a Steak 'n Shake restaurant, continued being antagonistic to each other inside the restaurant, and ultimately came to blows outside the restaurant, resulting in one person being run over by a car. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Goldsberry v. Grubbs
green
2 sentences2019The Goodwin analysis acknowledges the well-established public policy that proprietors are not "insurers of their patrons' safety." Id. at 394 . [12] Cavanaugh's relies on our supreme court's decision in Goodwin as support for its argument that it had no duty to protect Porterfield against the harm suffered. 2019The Goodwin analysis acknowledges the well-established public policy that proprietors are not "insurers of their patrons' safety." Id. at 394 . [12] Cavanaugh's relies on our supreme court's decision in Goodwin as support for its argument that it had no duty to protect Porterfield against the harm suffered. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Cox v. Stoughton Trailers, Inc.
green
2 sentences2018Public Policy [32] The final factor in the Goodwin test is the public policy consideration of "who is, or should be, in the best position to prevent injury and how society should allocate the costs of such injury." Cox v. Stoughton Trailers, Inc. , 837 N.E.2d 1075 , 1080 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). 2018Public Policy [32] The final factor in the Goodwin test is the public policy consideration of "who is, or should be, in the best position to prevent injury and how society should allocate the costs of such injury." Cox v. Stoughton Trailers, Inc. , 837 N.E.2d 1075 , 1080 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Estate of Zachary D. Staggs by and through his Personal Rep., Denise Coulter v. ADS Logistics Co., LLC
green
2 sentences2018The Staggs Court held, "[i]t is apparent that the party best suited to prevent an injury to motorists with respect to commercial cargo secured to a flatbed trailer is the entity responsible for securing, hauling, and checking the cargo during the drive." Staggs , op. at *5, 102 N.E.3d at 326 . 2018The Staggs Court held, "[i]t is apparent that the party best suited to prevent an injury to motorists with respect to commercial cargo secured to a flatbed trailer is the entity responsible for securing, hauling, and checking the cargo during the drive." Staggs , op. at *5, 102 N.E.3d at 326 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
F. John Rogers, as Personal Representative of Paul Michalik, and R. David Boyer, Trustee of the Bankruptcy Estate of Jerry Lee Chambers v. Angela Martin and Brian Paul Brothers
green
2 sentences2017We must look at the “broad type of plaintiff’ and the “broad type of harm,” and we will find a duty- where “reasonable persons would recognize it and agree that it exists.” Rogers, 63 N.E.3d at 325 . 2017We must look at the “broad type of plaintiff” and the “broad type of harm,” and we will find a duty where “reasonable persons would recognize it and agree that it exists.” Rogers, 63 N.E.3d at 325 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.