Preview:

FOR PUBLICATION

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: STEVEN E. SPRINGER ERIC D. JOHNSON Kightlinger & Gray, LLP Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES: KENNETH COLLIER-MAGAR Collier-Magar & Roberts, P.C. Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
LORA WILSON BROWN, Appellant-Plaintiff, vs. BRIAN S. ALEXANDER and RICHMOND POWER AND LIGHT, Appellees-Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 89A04-0702-CV-73

APPEAL FROM THE WAYNE SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable P. Thomas Snow, Judge Cause No. 89D01-0409-CT-28

November 15, 2007

OPINION - FOR PUBLICATION

KIRSCH, Judge

Lora Wilson Brown ("Brown") appeals from the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Richmond Power and Light ("P&L") and Brian S. Alexander ("Alexander"). The sole issue presented for our review is whether the trial court erred as a matter of law in holding that Brown failed to substantially comply with the notice provisions under the Indiana Tort Claims Act, IC 34-13-3-1 to -25 (the "ITCA"). We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 27, 2002, Brown was driving her automobile when a loose trailer, which had been attached to a P&L truck being driven by Alexander, crossed the centerline and collided head-on with Brown's automobile. At the time of the accident, Alexander was driving the truck in the course and scope of his employment with P&L. P&L is a governmental agency of the City of Richmond. 1 The undisputed evidence established that a safety chain was missing from the trailer prior to the accident but had never been replaced. Appellant's App. at 30-31. As a result of the accident, Brown's car was totaled and she incurred "over $44,000 in medical expenses." Appellant's Br. at 2. Shortly after the accident, P&L employee Robert Hart notified Laurie Boyce about the accident. Boyce was a claims representative with The Hylant Group ("Hylant"), which was the third-party administrator responsible for claims arising out of the Indiana Municipal

While neither party contends that P&L is anything other than a governmental agency for purposes of the ITCA, we note this court's holding in Turner v. Richmond Power and Light Co., where, in a case involving worker's compensation issues, our court found that "[P&L] was a hybrid entity; it retained aspects that indicated that it was an agency or department of the City of Richmond, and other aspects which indicated that it was a separate and distinct entity from the municipality." 763 N.E.2d 1005, 1007 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002), trans. denied.

1

2

Insurance Fund. In her position with Hylant, Boyce had the authority to settle Brown's claim on behalf of P&L and Alexander up to a certain dollar limit. Boyce began working on Brown's claim on September 30, 2002, tried to contact Brown and, while investigating both the cause of the accident and the extent of her injuries, made the following notes: 9/30/2002: trailer came unhitched & hit OV. Loss notice indicates total loss of 1987 Toyota & also indicates injury to leg & head of claimant. Initial reserve set to cover cost of total loss plus med pay. Will update reserve if necessary after further info obtained. 9/30/2002: Do not have telephone number for claimant. Checked claim rep web sight [sic] but did not come up w/number for claimant. Sending ltr to clmt asking her to call. Loss notice indicates claimant was injured in accident, so will take recorded statement when she calls. 9/30/2002: Per Bob Hart clmt was pinned in car for about

Download Lora Wilson Brown v. Brian S. Alexander and Richmond Power and Light.pdf

Indiana Law