Anthony E. Boyd v. WHTIV, Inc. and Walter Tarr, IV
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KIRSCH, Judge.
After the trial court denied Anthony E. Boyd’s (“Boyd”) motion for an extension of time to respond to the summary judgment motion filed by defendants WHTIV, Inc. and Walter Tarr, IV (collectively “Employer”), and it thereafter granted Employer’s summary judgment motion, Boyd filed a motion to correct error, which the trial court denied. He now appeals, raising two issues that we restate as:
I. Whether the trial court erred when it determined that Indiana Trial Rule 6(E), which extends by three days the deadline to respond following service by United States mail, did not…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Harness v. SchmittIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
- HomEq Servicing Corp. v. BakerIndiana Supreme Court · 2008
- Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. CharlesIndiana Court of Appeals · 2009
- DeLage Landen Financial Services, Inc. v. Community Mental Health Center, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012
- Ballaban v. Bloomington Jewish Community, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2013
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In the Matter of the Adoption and Paternity of K.G.B., E.S. v. T.B. and K.B.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2014
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society v. BowlingIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, Not In Its Individual Capacity But Solely as Trustee for the Primestar-H Fund I Trust v. Ty Bowling and Asset Acceptance, LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015