one satisfaction rule (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

one satisfaction rule in Indiana

6 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2020 0 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Mendenhall v. SKINNER AND BROADBENT CO.green
ind · 2000 · cited in 3 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2001–2013
2 sentences

2013See Mendenhall v. Skinner & Broadbent Co., 728 N.E.2d 140, 145 (Ind. 2000).

2011See id.; Mendenhall v. Skinner & Broadbent Co., 728 N.E.2d 140, 141 (Ind.2000) (noting that an “injured party is entitled to only one satisfaction for a single injury and the payment by one joint tort-feasor inures to the benefit of all”).

33
Indiana Department of Insurance v. Everhartgreen
ind · 2012 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020See Everhart, 960 N.E.2d at 140 (“The purpose of the one-satisfaction doctrine is to prevent a plaintiff from realizing more than one recovery.

11
Minix v. CANARECCIgreen
indctapp · 2011 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Id. at 1100-01 (emphasis in original) (citations omitted). [14] Stated differently, “[u]nder the one satisfaction rule, where a plaintiff asserts that the wrongful acts of two or more joint tortfeasors caused a single injury, satisfaction of the loss by one tortfeasor releases all other joint tortfeasors.” Minix v. Canarecci, 956 N.E.2d 62, 74 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Cavens v. Zaberdac green
ind · 2006
1 sentence

2013Id.

12013–2013
Palmer v. Comprehensive Neurologic Services, P.C. green
indctapp · 2007
1 sentence

2012Palmer, 864 N.E.2d at 1100-01 .

12012–2012

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IN § Ind. Code § 34-18-14-3 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TX 233 (1982–2026) IN 6 (2001–2020) PA 6 (2020–2021) MD 5 (2001–2026) DC 3 (1996–2009) OK 2 (1996–1996) OR 2 (2026–2026)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check