Legal Opinion

City of Gary v. Conat

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 29, 2004No. 45A03-0312-CV-486PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RILEY, Judge.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Appellants-Defendants, the City of Gary (the City) and Ambrogio Calo (Calo) (collectively, Appellants), appeal the trial court's grant of Appellee-Plaintiffs, Michael O. Conat (Conat), Motion to Enforce Settlement and Enter Judgment.

We affirm, in part, and reverse, in part.

ISSUES

Appellants raise three issues on appeal, which we restate as follows:

1. Whether the trial court erred by granting Conat's Motion, enforcing a Mediated Settlement Agreement against the City, where the City's Attorney had no express authority to enter into the settlement;

2.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Bushong v. WilliamsonIndiana Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Georgos v. JacksonIndiana Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Koval v. SIMON TELELECT. INC.Indiana Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Speckman v. City of IndianapolisIndiana Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Thompson v. PershingIndiana Supreme Court · 1882

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Hansen v. Board of Trustees of Hamilton Southeastern School Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2008
  2. Mayes v. City of Hammond, InDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2006
  3. Ellis v. City of MartinsvilleIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Utica Mutual Insurance Company v. Vigo Coal Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
  5. Utica Mutual Insurance v. Vigo Coal Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004

7 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