Sec. 7. (a) This section applies to an action based on
fault that is:
(1) brought against one (1) defendant or two (2) or more
defendants who may be treated as a single party; and
(2) tried to a jury.
(b) The court, unless all the parties agree otherwise, shall instruct
the jury to determine its verdict in the following manner:
(1) The jury shall determine the percentage of fault of the
claimant, of the defendant, and of any person who is a nonparty.
The jury may not be informed of any immunity defense that is
available to a nonparty. In assessing percentage of fault, the jury
shall consider the fault of all persons who caused or contributed
to cause the alleged injury, death, or damage to property, tangible
or intangible, regardless of whether the person was or could have
been named as a party. The percentage of fault of parties to the
action may total less than one hundred percent (100%) if the jury
finds that fault contributing to cause the claimant's loss has also
come from a nonparty or nonparties.
(2) If the percentage of fault of the claimant is greater than fifty
percent (50%) of the total fault involved in the incident which
caused the claimant's death, injury, or property damage, the jury
shall return a verdict for the defendant and no further deliberation
of the jury is required.
(3) If the percentage of fault of the claimant is not greater than
fifty percent (50%) of the total fault, the jury then shall determine
the total amount of damages the claimant would be entitled to
recover if contributory fault were disregarded.
(4) The jury next shall multiply the percentage of fault of the
defendant by the amount of damages determined under
subdivision (3) and shall then enter a verdict for the claimant in
the amount of the product of that multiplication.
[Pre-1998 Recodification Citation: 34-4-33-5(a).]
As added by P.L.1-1998, SEC.47.
Notes of Decisions
Paragon Fam. Restaurant v. Bartolini, 799 N.E.2d 1048 (Ind. 2003).
· cites it 4× “" Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7 (b). The Act declares that the "requirements of causal relation" apply to the determination of fault.”
Webber v. Butner, 923 F.3d 479 (7th Cir. 2019).
· cites it 3× “This ruling was reflected in an instruction to the jury. The jury returned a verdict apportioning 51% of fault to plaintiff Webber and 49% to defendant Butner.”
Kocher v. Getz, 824 N.E.2d 671 (Ind. 2005).
· cites it 6× “Ind.Code §§ 34-51-2-7, -8. 10 . Id. 11 . Id.”
Witte v. Mundy Ex Rel. Mundy, 820 N.E.2d 128 (Ind. 2005).
· cites it 2× “" Ind.Code § 34-51-2-7 (2004). As the Court of Appeals pointed out, until 1995, a "nonparty" was defined as "a person who is, or may be liable to the claimant in part or in whole for the damages claimed but who has not been joined in the action as a defendant by the claimant.”
Creasy v. Rusk, 730 N.E.2d 659 (Ind. 2000).
· cites it 3× “CODE §§ 34-51-2-7 & 34-51-2-8. Accordingly, I concur in the majority's holding in Part I that a person with a mental disability owes a duty of reasonable care.”
Indiana Dep't of Ins. v. Everhart, 960 N.E.2d 129 (Ind. 2012).
· cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 34-51-2-7, -8 (2008). In exchange for giving negligent plaintiffs greater access to the courts, however, the Act abrogates the old rule of joint and several liability in suits to which the Act applies.”
Kocher v. Getz, 787 N.E.2d 418 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 8× “See I.C. § 34-51-2-7. Thus, unlike the court in Deible, 691 N.”
Kmart Corp. v. Englebright, 719 N.E.2d 1249 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 34-51-2-7. Rather than completely foreclosing a plaintiffs recovery, under the Act, the plaintiffs recovery is reduced by the proportion of fault attributable to him.”
Dennerline v. Atterholt, 886 N.E.2d 582 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “" Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7 (b)(1). Dennerline does not challenge any of the jury instructions regarding fault allocation in this appeal.”
Solnosky v. Goodwell, 892 N.E.2d 174 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Ind.Code Ann. § 34-51-2-14 (West Supp.1999).”
Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7(b): 3 cases
Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7(b)(1): 8 cases
Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7(b)(2): 1 case
Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7(b)(3): 1 case
Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7(b)(4): 1 case
Ind. Code § 34-51-2-7(b)(l): 3 cases
Solnosky v. Goodwell, 892 N.E.2d 174 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
“Ind.Code Ann. § 34-51-2-14 (West Supp.1999).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.