Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ransburg v. Richards

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 20, 2002No. 29A05-0101-CV-25Published

1Dissent

NAJAM, Judge,

dissenting..I respectfully dissent. The majority opinion nullifies a valid private agreement, rewrites the lease, and reallocates the exchange of costs and benefits between the parties. The majority declares that the exculpatory clause in question is void and unenforceable because it "contravenes long established common law rules of tort liability" and "offends the public policy of the state." In making this new rule the majority assumes what it seeks to prove, namely, that the law of negligence and the law of contract occupy mutually exclusive spheres and cannot be reconciled on…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Weaver v. American Oil CompanyIndiana Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Fresh Cut, Inc. v. FazliIndiana Supreme Court · 1995
  3. LaFrenz v. Lake County Fair BoardIndiana Court of Appeals · 1977
  4. Hogston v. BellIndiana Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Straub v. B.M.T. Ex Rel. ToddIndiana Supreme Court · 1994

15 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