Bowman v. Kitchel
Indiana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
SHEPARD, Chief Justice.
Appellants Bill and Mary Bowman contend that the trial court erred by refusing their request to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law in their small claims case. We grant transfer and hold that Trial Rule 52 does not apply in small claims proceedings.
The Bowmans brought their small claim against Sam Kitchel, who was doing business as Kitchel Concrete Service. The Bowmans had hired Kitchel to install a new concrete walk and replace an old driveway at their home, for a charge of about $2900. After Kitchel finished the work, the Bowmans noticed discoloration,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Muenich v. GuldenIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
3Cited by22 opinions
- Mitchell v. MitchellIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
- Bennett v. BroderickIndiana Court of Appeals · 2006
- Kalwitz v. KalwitzIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
- McKeighen v. Daviess County Fair BoardIndiana Court of Appeals · 2009
- David Vance v. Francisco LozanoIndiana Court of Appeals · 2012
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.