Skip to content
Search events. View events.
  Courts, Indiana Submit Events
Welcome to the IN.gov Calendar. Please use the Help button to the right for any assistance while using the Calendar.
Click for help in using calendar displays. Print the contents of the current screen.

Advanced Search (New Search)
  From:
  To:

 

 

 


Submit
Entry Details
Notify me if this event changes.Add this event to my personal calendar.Email this entry to a friend.
Go Back
[APPEALS] State Farm v. Radcliff 29A04-1311-CT-542
Start Date: 8/20/2014Start Time: 10:00 AM
End Date: 8/20/2014End Time: 10:40 AM
Entry Description
This largest defamation verdict in Indiana’s history is once again before this court as an appeal to the trial court’s denial of State Farm’s Trial Rule 60(B) motion.  In its T.R. 60(B) motion, State Farm requested the trial court to grant a new trial on the limited issue of defamation based on State Farm’s discovery of new evidence purportedly establishing that Radcliff had procured the verdict by committing fraud on the court. 

In its appeal, State Farm presents this court with four procedural issues which we restate as follows:

1.     Characterizing its T.R. 60(B) motion as solely a T.R. 60(B)(3) motion based on fraud and misconduct, State Farm asserts that the trial court abused its discretion by interpreting its T.R. 60(B) motion as a T.R. 60(B)(2) motion based on newly discovered evidence and applying T.R. 60(B)(2)’s requirements to its T.R. 60(B)(3) motion.

2.    Whether the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that State Farm’s T.R. 60(B)(3) motion was barred by the law of the case due to this court’s denial of State Farm’s Appellate Rule 37 motion for remand in the first appeal where this court addressed State Farm’s request for alternative relief based on “waiver notwithstanding” and our supreme court subsequently denied State Farm’s request for emergency relief based on its T.R. 60(B) motion.

3.    Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying State Farm’s T.R. 60(B) motion as a matter of law.

4.    Whether the trial court abused its discretion in declining to allow State Farm to engage in further protracted discovery pursuant to T.R. 60(D) and in ruling on the motion without an evidentiary hearing when Radcliff elected to respond to State Farm’s T.R. 60(B) motion on legal grounds as opposed to factual grounds and therefore no further pertinent evidence would need to be submitted to the trial court to aid in its ruling.  

Location:
Room 413 Statehouse
200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204

The scheduled panel is Judge Riley, Judge Robb and Judge Bradford.
Contact Information:
Name: Martin DeAgostino
Phone: 317-234-4859
Email: martin.deagostino@courts.in.gov
Default
Entry Type:
Event
Entry Category:
  • Oral Arguments
  • IN.gov Category:
  • Government
  • Agency Name
    Courts, Indiana

    Calendar software powered by Active Data Calendar   
    Select item(s) to Search






    Select item(s) to Search
    Select item(s) to Search

    Select item(s) to Search