By Pete Elliott, Indiana Commercial Court
On January 27, 2022, the IndyBar Business Law Section held its first CLE of the year, the Business Case Law Update. I had the privilege to discuss several decisions issued by the Indiana Supreme Court and Court of Appeals over the course of 2021 that covered a number of different topics directly related to the practice of business law.
The discussion began with decisions impacting whether certain claims could be brought before a trial court at all. Palmer v. Ake, No. 21A-CT-1245, 2021 Ind. App. LEXIS 400 (Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2021) provided an assessment of when a laborer injured while performing construction services onsite should be treated as an employee or independent contractor for the purposes of ascertaining whether his claims were subject to Indiana’s Worker’s Compensation Act. The Family Dental Care P.C. v. Mousa opinion discussed the stringent requirements for bringing a claim under Indiana’s Wage Payment Statute. No. 21A-PL-670, 2021 Ind. App. LEXIS 412 (Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2021).
The discussion next touched on the applicability of arbitration agreements that were the subject of the opinions in Reitenour v. M/I Homes of Ind. L.P., 176 N.E.3d 505 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021) and Fin. Ctr. First Credit Union v. Rivera, No. 21A-CC-845, 2021 Ind. App. LEXIS 345 (Ct. App. Nov. 9, 2021). This section included the Supreme Court’s decision in Doe v. Carmel Operator LLC, 160 N.E.3d 518 (Ind. 2021), which spelled out the equitable estoppel test for when a non-party to a contract can seek to compel arbitration under that contract in Indiana.
The presentation moved on to discuss cases involving de facto mergers, New Nello Operating Co. LLC v. CompressAir, 168 N.E.3d 238 (Ind. 2021), document reformations based on mistake, Cutter v. Jurus, N.E.3d 492 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021); Fox v. Barker, 170 N.E.3d 662 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021); Nuell Inc. v. Marsillett, 164 N.E.3d 768 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021), and applications of specific contract provisions (Albanese Confectionery Grp., Inc. v. Cwik, 165 N.E.3d 139 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021); CW Farms, LLC v. Egg Innovations LLC, 169 N.E.3d 874 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021). We also discussed the applicability of terms in governing documents of business associations, Hartman v. BigInch Fabricators & Constr. Holding Co., 161 N.E.3d 1218 (Ind. 2021) and partnership issues, Wolfe v. Agro, 163 N.E.3d 913 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021).
The discussion concluded with issues related to post-judgment relief. The appellate courts issued a number of opinions on piercing the corporate veil, including when it is permissible to do so, Blackwell v. Superior Safe Rooms LLC, 174 N.E.3d 1082 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021) and when it is not. Martin v. Top Quality Prof'l Constr. LLC, No. 21A-SC-1337, 2021 Ind. App. LEXIS 389 (Ct. App. Dec. 15, 2021). The presentation also touched on cases where relief from judgment had been sought for a variety of reasons, Eastridge v. Estate of Richard Rayles, 177 N.E.3d 875 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021); RAB Performance Recoveries LLC v. Knight, 174 N.E.3d 228 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021), including a matter where the purportedly defaulting party had potentially been a victim of a sophisticated identity theft scheme. Logansport/Cass Co. Airport Auth. v. Kochenower, 169 N.E.3d 1143 (Ind. Ct. App. 2021).
I appreciated the opportunity to discuss those cases with the members of our section and look forward to what next year’s case law update may bring.
If you would like to learn more, you can purchase and download this year's Business Case Law Update presentation now, complete with online CLE credit! Download and watch now here.
If you would like to submit content or write an article for the Business Law Section, please email Kara Sikorski at ksikorski@indybar.org.
Subscribe to Business Law Section news here!
member center
