Legal Opinion

Quakenbush v. Lackey

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided December 14, 1992No. 49A04-9204-CV-113PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHEZEM, Judge.

Case Summary

Plaintiffs-Appellants, - Tricia - Quaken-bush, Samuel McAfee, Mac Medlin, and Larry Allen (sometimes collectively, "Appellants"), appeal from summary judgment granted to Defendants-Appellees, Florence E. Lackey and City of Indianapolis (Lackey). We affirm.

Issue

Whether Lackey was entitled to summary judgment based upon immunity under the Indiana Tort Claims Act.

Facts and Procedural History

Lackey, a patrol officer for the Indianapolis Police Department, was dispatched to a report of a man beating a woman in a parking lot. Lackey, driving a marked police car, was going…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Peavler v. BD. OF COM'RS MONROE CTY.Indiana Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Collier v. PraterIndiana Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Seymour National Bank v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Tittle v. MahanIndiana Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Interstate Auction, Inc. v. Central National Insurance, Group, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1983

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Quakenbush v. LackeyIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Fries v. FincherIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Fries v. FincherIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Belding v. Town of New WhitelandIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. Fries v. FincherIndiana Supreme Court · 1993

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API