In re Johnson
| Court | U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Indiana |
| Writing for the Court | KENT LINDQUIST |
| Citation | In re Johnson, 120 B.R. 461 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1990) |
| Decision Date | 23 February 1990 |
| Docket Number | Adv. No. 88-6020.,Bankruptcy No. 87-62145 |
| Parties | In re Paul Hiram JOHNSON, Debtor. Tim ROLAND, Kenneth Roland, Plaintiffs, v. Paul Hiram JOHNSON, Defendant. |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
William Kowalski, East Chicago, Ind., for plaintiffs.
David Wickland, Munster, Ind., for defendant.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND JUDGMENT1
This adversary proceeding came on for the second-half of a bifurcated bench trial on February 8, 1990 solely on the issue as to the amount of damages to be affixed versus the Defendant-Debtor (hereinafter: "Debtor").
The first-half of the bench trial was held on April 6, 1989 on the issue of liability only, i.e. whether the indebtedness of the Debtor to the Plaintiffs (hereinafter: "Plaintiff Ken, Plaintiff Tim or Plaintiffs") was nondischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(6) as being the result of certain willful and malicious acts by the Debtor.
By its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment dated April 14, 1989, this Court held that the indebtedness was nondischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(6) in that the Debtor intentionally shot the Plaintiffs with the requisite constructive malice in that he acted unreasonably under the circumstances, and without just cause or excuse, as he intended to shoot whomever was in the living room of his residence, although he had no specific intent to shoot the Plaintiffs. 109 B.R. 885. The shooting occurred on September 22, 1984.
Plaintiffs appear by Attorney Kowalski.
Debtor appears by Attorney Wickland.
Submitted. Evidence and arguments heard.
Findings of Fact
The Plaintiffs filed the following pretrial exhibits:
The Debtor had no objection to the authenticity of the above exhibits, and thus they were admitted into evidence without extrinsic proof of identification by a custodian thereof.
The Plaintiff Ken testified as follows:
The Plaintiff Tim testified as follows:
The Debtor objected to this testimony as to the bills in excess of $10,000.00 for the initial hospitalization on the grounds this was inadmissible hearsay. The Court reserved its ruling on that objection.
Doris Randall testified as follows:
The Debtor again objected to the testimony as to the bill allegedly in excess of $10,000.00 on the grounds of hearsay.2 The Court reserved its ruling as to this objection and now sustains the same.
The Plaintiff Ken's exhibits reflect the following actual damages incurred by him as a result of the shooting:
1. Dr. Williams $ 2,475.00
2. Dr. Smalls 4,245.00
3. Methodist Hospital 17,362.35
4. Emergency Room 125.00
5. Radiology 48.00
6. Anesthesia 330.00
7. Pathology 100.00
==========
TOTAL $24,668.35
The Plaintiff Ken also lost $3,500.00 in wages for a total of $28,185.35.
The Plaintiff Ken's medical reports were admitted as Plaintiff's Exhibits No. 3.
The Plaintiff Tim's exhibits reflected the following actual damages incurred by him as a result of the shooting:
1. St. Margaret Hospital $ 1,317.20
2. Dr. Williams 1,500.00
3. Dr. Johnson 6,375.00
4. Nucleopath 1,588.00
5. St. Mary Hospital
A. " 3,348.55
B. " 3,970.75
C. " 8,496.50
==========
TOTAL $26,595.80
The Plaintiff Tim was not employed at the time of the shooting and could not prove any lost wages as a result thereof.
The Plaintiff Tim's medical report by St. Margaret Hospital, Dr. Johnson, and St. Mary Medical Center were admitted into evidence as Plaintiff's Exhibit Nos. 10, 12 and 14 respectively.
Having determined that the indebtedness by the Debtor to the Plaintiffs is nondischargeable, the Court is faced with the more difficult task of affixing damages.
Although, whether or not a debt is nondischargeable is a federal question, the underlying debt, i.e. an obligation for assault and battery itself is a state-based claim.
In diversity cases in a federal court wherein a state-based claim is being adjudicated, damages are determined by the applicable state law. Lincoln Nat. Life Insur. Co. v. NCR Corp., 772 F.2d 315 (7th Cir.1985). Federal Courts applying Indiana...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting