Stainko v. Tri-State Coach Lines, Inc.
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
STATON, Judge.
This appeal concerns Andrew Stainko's fall into a work pit in the defendants' garage. The trial court, finding that Stainko had incurred the risk as a matter of law, awarded summary judgment to the defendants. We consider the following issues:
1. Whether Stainko was a licensee or an invitee on the defendants' property.
2. Whether the evidence and inferences, read in a light most favorable to Stainko, establish as a matter of law that he voluntarily exposed himself to the peril of an uncovered, unlighted, and unguarded work pit.
We reverse.
The evidence favorable to Stainko, the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Plummer v. DillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Kroger Co. v. HaunIndiana Court of Appeals · 1978
- Beckett v. Clinton Prairie School Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 1987
- Kahf v. Charleston South ApartmentsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
- Power v. BrodieIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Schooley v. Ingersoll Rand, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1994
- Ferguson v. Modern Farm Systems, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1990
- Forrest v. GilleyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
- Mauller v. City of ColumbusIndiana Court of Appeals · 1990
- Tina M. McDONALD, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SANDVIK PROCESS SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.