Kapusta v. DePuy Mfg. Co.
| Citation | 234 N.E.2d 487,13 Ind.Dec. 311,249 Ind. 679 |
| Decision Date | 05 March 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 20619,20619 |
| Parties | Joseph KAPUSTA, Appellant, v. DePUY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Inc., Appellee. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
This case is here on petition to transfer from the Appellate Court. (See opinion reported in 229 N.E.2d 828.)
This was a personal injury action instituted by the petitioner-appellant. The trial court granted a summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment holding that (1) a release given by appellant purporting to release all persons from liability for all injuries sustained from an automobile accident was a good defense for appellee, and (2) summary judgment was appropriate since affidavits filed by appellee showed the lack of a material issue of fact.
After a review of the petition to transfer and of the Appellate Court decision we are of the opinion that the Appellate Court reached a correct result and the petition to transfer should be denied. However, we cannot approve of the language in the opinion which states:
'In any event, appellant's failure to file counter-affidavits gave force to a prima facia showing that appellee, the moving party, was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.' 229 N.E.2d at 832.
We believe this language is contrary to the statute, Ind.Ann.Stat. § 2--2524(e) (Supp.1967):
(Our emphasis.)
The language in the opinion seems to indicate that the trial court need not decide if there is a material issue of fact.
Ind.Ann.Stat. § 2--2524(c) (Supp.1967) provides:
'The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact * * *'
We construe the words 'if appropriate' in subsection (e), in light of subsection (c) to still require a finding that there is no genuine issue as to any material...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dallas Co., Inc. v. William Tobias Studio, Inc.
...testimony offered upon the matters placed in issue by the pleadings or such evidence.' See also, Kapusta DePuy Mfg. Co. v. DuPuy Manufacturing Co. (1968), 249 Ind. 679, 234 N.E.2d 487, 488; McNabb v. Mason (1970), 148 Ind.App. 233, 264 N.E.2d 623, We need look no further. From the record be......
-
Commissioner, Indiana State Highway Dept. v. Collins
...a genuine issue of material fact exists based upon the pleadings, affidavits, and evidence before him. Kapusta v. DePuy Manufacturing Co. (1968), 249 Ind. 679, 234 N.E.2d 487. See also Smith v. P. & B. Corp. (1979), Ind.App., 386 N.E.2d 1232; Illinois Valley Acceptance Corp. v. Woodard (197......
-
Doe v. Barnett
...no controversy as to any material fact that summary judgment can be granted. Ind.Ann.Stat. § 2--2524(c), supra; Kapusta v. De Puy Mfg. Co. (Ind., 234 N.E.2d 487 (1968)), supra; Fountain v. Filson, (336 U.S. 681, 69 S.Ct. 754, 93 L.Ed. 971, (1949)), Summary judgment cannot be granted, howeve......
-
Fischer v. Kaylor
...granting of summary judgment by the trial court must be affirmed. Schill v. Choate, Ind.App., 247 N.E.2d 688 (1969); Kapusta v. DePuy Mfg. Co., Ind., 234 N.E.2d 487 (1968); Personnett v. Great A & P Tea Co., Ind.App., 237 N.E.2d 281 (1968); Markwell v. General Tire & Rubber Co., Ind.App., 2......