Legal Opinion · Dissent

Catt v. Board of Com'rs of Knox County

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided October 16, 2000No. 42A01-9911-CV-396Published

1DissentSharpnack, C.J.

I respectfully dissent. The statute providing immunity, Ind. Code § 31-13-3-3, is plain enough:

A governmental entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee’s employment is not liable if a loss results from:

[[Image here]](3) the temporary condition of a public thoroughfare that results from weather.

I.C. § 31-13-3-3(3). This statute protects the governmental entity where it would otherwise be liable by reason of its negligence. Leinbach v. State, 587 N.E.2d 733, 736 (Ind.Ct.App.1992).

There is no real question here that the absence of the culvert was due to the heavy rain, which…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Leinbach v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API