Legal Opinion

City of Peru v. Brooks

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided February 18, 1997No. 52A02-9606-CV-387Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BARTEAU, Judge.

The City of Peru and the Peru Park Maintenance Department (collectively “Peru”) bring this interlocutory appeal challenging the trial court’s denial of Peru’s motion for summary judgment in a negligence action. *394We address the following issue: Is Peru immune from liability under the Indiana Tort Claims Act?

We affirm.

FACTS

The facts most favorable to the non-moving party are that in June, 1993, the Peru Park Maintenance Department sponsored a volunteer day at Maconaquah Park in Peru, Indiana. Volunteers from the city and county helped to clean up the park. No one was in…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Midwest Commerce Banking Co. v. LivingsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. State Board of Accounts v. Indiana University FoundationIndiana Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. Rotec, Division of Orbitron, Inc. v. Murray Equipment, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1993
  4. Jacobs v. Board of Com'rs of Morgan CountyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. Hendricks County Board of Zoning Appeals v. BarlowIndiana Court of Appeals · 1995

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

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

Powered by the Exa API