Legal Opinion

Canfield v. Sandock

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided December 4, 1989No. 71A03-8809-CV-274PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge.

Appellant David J. Canfield, Jr. appeals a jury trial judgment in favor of Melvin and Betty Sandock. The facts indicate that as a result of an automobile-pedestrian accident on October 23, 1986, Melvin and Betty Sandock filed a complaint for negligence against Canfield alleging that Melvin “suf*1238fered temporary and permanent physical injury, temporary and permanent pain and suffering, mental suffering, medical expenses and economic loss.” The complaint also alleged that Betty suffered a loss of consortium. Canfield v. Sandock (1988), Ind.App., 521 N.E.2d 704, 705 (transfer…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. McDougald v. GarberNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. Willinger v. Mercy Catholic Medical CenterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. Flannery v. United StatesWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Dunn v. CadienteIndiana Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Antcliff v. DatzmanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Canfield v. SandockIndiana Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Canfield v. SandockIndiana Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Canfield v. SandockIndiana Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. Seifert v. BlandIndiana Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Seifert v. BlandIndiana Court of Appeals · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API