Legal Opinion

Harlow v. Parkevich

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 21, 2007No. 29A02-0607-CV-569PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SHARPNACK, Judge.

Maribelle G. Harlow (“Harlow”) and Ernst & Young, LLP (“Ernst & Young”) (collectively, “Appellants”) appeal the trial court’s denial of their motion to stay litigation with Gayle Parkevich, individually, as successor trustee and beneficiary of the Amendment and Restatement of Vernon Payne Inter Vivos Trust, and as beneficiary of the Vernon Payne and Elva Payne Irrevocable Trust for Beverly Draper (“Parkevich”). Appellants raise one issue, which we restate as whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying their motion to stay the litigation pending alternative…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. ByrdSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. W. R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 759, International Union of the United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Trotter v. NelsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Chesterfield Management, Inc. v. CookIndiana Court of Appeals · 1995

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Barney v. STONEMOR OPERATING LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. Barney v. STONEMOR OPERATING LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011
  3. Weldon v. Asset Acceptance, LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. Weldon v. Asset Acceptance, LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API