Tankersley v. Parkview Hospital, Inc.

I dissent, believing that the Court of Appeals was correct. See Tankersley v. Parkview Hospital, Inc., 761 N.E.2d 886, 890-91 (Ind.Ct.App.2002).

The majority opinion today acknowledges that “[a]n unambiguous statute must be held to mean what it plainly expresses, and its plain and obvious meaning may not be enlarged or restricted.” Maj. opin. at 204. That is precisely what the Court of Appeals did.

The Hospital Lien Act applicable to this case provided that the filing of a lien by a hospital:

is notice to all persons, firms, limited liability companies, or corporations who may be liable because…