Preview:

FOR PUBLICATION
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: SHERWOOD P. HILL CLINTON E. BLANCK Maurer Rifkin & Hill, P.C. Carmel, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES: R. DANIEL CRAVEN Craven, Hoover & Blazek, P.C. Indianapolis, Indiana

FILED
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

Jun 02 2009, 8:53 am

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FREDERICK WILLIAM LACAVA, Appellant-Defendant, vs. DANIEL LACAVA and GEOFFREY LACAVA, Appellees-Plaintiffs. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CLERK

No. 49A04-0808-CV-451

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Robyn L. Moberly, Judge Cause No. 49D12-0506-CT-23718

June 2, 2009

OPINION - FOR PUBLICATION

ROBB, Judge

Case Summary and Issues Frederick William LaCava was sued by his adopted adult sons, Daniel and Geoffrey, for damages arising out of Fredericks alleged molestation of them when they were children. Frederick filed a motion for summary judgment alleging that the complaint was filed after the running of the statute of limitations. Frederick appeals the trial courts denial of his motion, raising four issues that we consolidate and restate as two: 1) whether Daniel and Geoffreys claims are barred by the statute of limitations, and 2) whether, in the absence of expert opinion evidence regarding Daniel and Geoffreys claims of repressed memory, their complaint can withstand summary judgment. Daniel and Geoffrey cross-appeal the trial courts denial of their third motion for extension of time to respond to Fredericks motion for summary judgment, alleging the trial court abused its discretion in denying them an extension for the purpose of gathering expert opinion evidence. Concluding that issues of fact preclude summary judgment in Fredericks favor on the statute of limitations and that Daniel and Geoffrey did not need to designate expert opinion evidence to refute Fredericks motion for summary judgment because of the position Frederick took with respect to their request for additional time to procure such evidence, we affirm. Facts and Procedural History1 The facts stated most favorably to Daniel and Geoffrey as the non-movants are as

We heard oral argument on April 9, 2009 in Indianapolis, Indiana, as part of the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association 21st Lifetime Achievement Seminar. We thank our hosts for the invitation and the attorneys for their presentations.

1

2

follows: Frederick and Elizabeth LaCava were married in 1966 and subsequently adopted five children

Download Frederick William LaCava v. Daniel and Geoffrey LaCava.pdf

Indiana Law