Legal Opinion
Burke v. DeLarosa
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided February 15, 1996No. 45A04-9509-CV-343PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHEZEM, Judge.
Case Summary
Appellant-Defendant, Thomas Burke (“Burke”), appeals the trial court’s denial of his Motion for Relief from Judgment. We affirm.
Issue
Burke presents three issues for review, which we consolidate and restate as: whether the requirement of a showing of a meritorious defense in order to be granted relief from judgment is constitutionally permissible.
Facts and Procedural History
The following facts are not in dispute: On November 27,1992, Burke was involved in an accident with the Appellees-Plaintiffs, Vincent and Lori DeLarosa (“DeLarosas”). Burke was insured by…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Shotwell v. Cliff Hagan Ribeye Franchise, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1991
- Kreczmer v. Allied Construction CompanyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1972
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Stidham v. WhelchelIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
- Kmart Corp. v. EnglebrightIndiana Court of Appeals · 1999
- Sears Roebuck and Co. v. NoppertIndiana Court of Appeals · 1999
- Butler v. Shipshewana Auction, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1998
- Weppler v. StansburyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1998
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.