Kapusta v. DePuy Mfg. Co.

Decision Date05 March 1968
Docket NumberNo. 20619,20619
Citation234 N.E.2d 487,13 Ind.Dec. 311,249 Ind. 679
PartiesJoseph KAPUSTA, Appellant, v. DePUY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Inc., Appellee.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

HUNTER, Judge.

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 decisionwe 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):

'When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading, but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against him.'(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...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your 3-day 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

vLex

Start Your 3-day 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

vLex

Start Your 3-day 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

vLex

Start Your 3-day 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

vLex

Start Your 3-day 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

vLex

Start Your 3-day 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

vLex
21 cases
  • Dallas Co., Inc. v. William Tobias Studio, Inc.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 14 Noviembre 1974
    ...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
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 29 Diciembre 1980
    ...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
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 29 Octubre 1969
    ...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
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 14 Agosto 1969
    ...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......
  • Get Started for Free