Noe Escamilla v. Shiel Sexton Company, Inc.
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
MAY, Judge.
[1] In this interlocutory appeal from the trial court’s pre-trial orders regarding the admissibility of evidence, the parties raise a number of broad policy questions regarding whether and how an injured plaintiffs status as an undocumented immigrant should impact that plaintiff’s ability to recover future lost wages from an alleged tortfeasor. We decline their invitations to make sweeping pronouncements about the rights of immigrants, however, and rule narrowly on the evidentiary issues raised. Although we disagree with part of the trial court’s reasoning, we affirm its denial of…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Rieth-Riley Construction Company, Inc. v. McCarrellIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
- Salas v. Hi-Tech ErectorsWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- Montgomery Ward & Co. v. GreggIndiana Court of Appeals · 1990
- Salas v. Hi-Tech ErectorsWashington Supreme Court · 2010
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Noe Escamilla v. Shiel Sexton Company, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 2017