Budget Car Sales v. Stott

662 N.E.2d 638, 1996 Ind. LEXIS 160, 1996 WL 118489
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 12, 1996
Docket11A04-9403-CV-114
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 662 N.E.2d 638 (Budget Car Sales v. Stott) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Budget Car Sales v. Stott, 662 N.E.2d 638, 1996 Ind. LEXIS 160, 1996 WL 118489 (Ind. 1996).

Opinion

*639 ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the Petition To Transfer filed by Appellee, Ralph Stott.

The Court notes that the Court of Appeals has applied an incorrect standard of review for the award of punitive damage by considering whether the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis of innocent conduct and by indicating that a defendant is cloaked with the presumption that tortious conduct was a noniniquitous human failing. Budget Car Sales v. Stott, 656 N.E.2d 261, 265 & 266 (Ind.Ct.App.1995). As explained in Bud Wolf Chevrolet, Inc. v. Robertson, 519 N.E.2d 135, 137-8 (Ind.1988), these two concepts from Orkin Exterminating Co. v. Traina, 486 N.E.2d 1019 (Ind.1986) have been superseded. Accord Erie Ins. Co. v. Hickman, 605 N.E.2d 161, 162 (Ind.1992); see also Erie Ins. Co. v. Hickman, 622 N.E.2d 515, 523 (Ind.1993).

The correct standard of review for punitive damages is whether, considering only the probative evidence and the reasonable inferences supporting it, without weighing evidence or assessing witness credibility, a reasonable trier of fact could find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with malice, fraud, gross negligence or oppressiveness which was not the result of a mistake of fact or law, honest error of judgment, overzealousness, mere negligence, or other human failing. Bud Wolf, 519 N.E.2d at 137.

However, having applied the correct standard of review, the Court reaches the same outcome as did the Court of Appeals herein. Accordingly, the Petition To Transfer is DENIED.

The Court directs West Publishing Company to publish this order.

The Clerk is directed to send copies of this order to the Hon. John T. Sharpnack, Chief Judge of the Indiana Court of Appeals; Steve Lancaster, Administrator for the Indiana Court of Appeals; Mrs. Janet Roberts Blue, Commissioner for the Indiana Court of Appeals; and to counsel of record.

Randall T. Shepard RANDALL T. SHEPARD Chief Justice of Indiana

All Justices concur, except DeBRULER, J., who is not participating due to absence from conference discussion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jason T. Myers v. Gary W. Myers
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2014
Jeremy Flax v. Daimler-Chrysler Corporation
272 S.W.3d 521 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2008)
Stroud v. Lints
790 N.E.2d 440 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2003)
INS Investigations Bureau, Inc. v. Lee
784 N.E.2d 566 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2003)
Executive Builders, Inc. v. Trisler
741 N.E.2d 351 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2000)
Coachmen Industries, Inc. v. Dunn
719 N.E.2d 1271 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1999)
Hart v. Steel Products, Inc.
666 N.E.2d 1270 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1996)
Deeanna Brewer v. Wal-Mart Stores, Incorporated
87 F.3d 203 (Seventh Circuit, 1996)
Schimizzi v. Illinois Farmers Insurance
928 F. Supp. 760 (N.D. Indiana, 1996)
Rogers v. Ford Motor Co.
925 F. Supp. 1413 (N.D. Indiana, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
662 N.E.2d 638, 1996 Ind. LEXIS 160, 1996 WL 118489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/budget-car-sales-v-stott-ind-1996.