Legal Opinion

Hartig v. Stratman

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 9, 2002No. 82A01-0105-CV-184PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

VAIDIK, Judge.

Case Summary

Timothy Hartig contends that the trial court erred in granting Melvin and Louise Stratman's Motion to Set Aside Judgment. In particular, Hartig asserts that the Stratmans were not entitled to have the judgment set aside based on newly discovered evidence because they failed to exercise due diligence in obtaining the evidence they now allege to be newly discovered. Because we find that the Stratmans did not exercise due diligence in obtaining the evidence that supported the trial court's decision to set aside the judgment in favor of Hartig prior to the summary…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lyles v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. Hill v. RameyIndiana Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. Tyson v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Hartig v. StratmanIndiana Court of Appeals · 2000
  5. Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. McKeehanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. McVey v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2007
  2. Cheng Song v. Thomas Iatarola and Theresa IatarolaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2017
  3. Tacco Falcon Point, Inc. v. Atlantic Ltd. Partnership XIIIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
  4. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company v. Joseph Martin Radcliff and Coastal Property Management, LLC, a/k/a CPM Construction of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2014
  5. James T. Mitchell v. 10th and the Bypass, LLC, and Elway, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012

4 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