Dr. Rick Sasso is a renowned spinal surgeon and inventor of technology used in spinal surgery. Sasso assigned certain intellectual property rights, including patents, to Medtronic and was promised royalties in return. Sasso was not receiving all the royalties that he thought were owed and sued Medtronic for breach of two contracts.

If someone at a hospital accesses and distributes a patient’s private medical information, what is the proper process that the patient should use to pursue their claims?

Separators is a centrifuge company. Over the course of its existence, it has amassed a large collection of reference materials, all of which have been digitized. Carmichael was Separators’ parts manager for eight years, and Monday was Carmichael’s assistant.

Molly Melton is an athletic trainer licensed by the Athletic Trainers Certification Board. The members of the Board are appointed by the governor and can impose disciplinary sanctions.

The last case shows that a contractor cannot get around HICA’s provisions by refusing to bill a homeowner. This case addresses another way that a contractor tried to get around HICA’s provisions—by arguing that an amended version of the contract related back to the signing of the original contract.

People often disagree about how to run a business, and sometimes those disagreements can be so fundamental that the parties decide to split ways.

The plaintiff in this case got the dream of every plaintiff’s attorney—a default judgment against a defendant with an apparent ability to pay. But the case was not done, because the defendant showed up to defend himself in a damages trial.

Arbitration agreements are a regular part of everyday commercial life, even for consumers. And these agreements generally bind the parties to arbitration. The question posed in this case is the circumstances under which those agreements apply to nonparties.

Forum-selection clauses are common in many kinds of contracts. But you may not know that these clauses are sometimes void, as this case shows.

This case arises from injuries a woman suffered while trying to care for a goat on another woman’s farm.

When people play sports, they sometimes get hurt. And Indiana law recognizes that when someone is hurt by another sports participant, there is generally no liability. That is also true if the participant who hurts another is a coach.

This case is a word of warning to those who are disabled—you may need to prove your disability, rather than just claim it, in order to get an accommodation.

An employer is, of course, vicariously liable for the negligence of its employees when they act in the course and scope of their employment. But Indiana has erected procedures around the way in which plaintiffs may bring medical malpractice claims.

Lawyers have long sought to take the Latin out of the legal lexicon. But there are still a few holdouts, such as the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. This case addresses the burden a defendant must meet in order to get summary judgment when that doctrine is at issue.

This case centers on the extent to which a party must update the incorrect testimony of one of its witnesses and the proper remedy if it does not do so.

Last May, we told you about a decision from the Court of Appeals dealing with liability after an asset-only purchase. The Court of Appeals found that there was a de facto merger when the assets were bought, so the new company was liable for the debts of the old. The Indiana Supreme Court was sufficiently intrigued by this subject to grant transfer.

In this case, the plaintiff’s attorney encountered a nightmare for any proponent of an expert witness—the witness started saying unnecessary things that could call his qualifications as an expert into question.

Corporations are often liable for personal injuries as a result of a particular employee’s negligence. But what happens if the particular employee at issue is not liable?

Last July, we told you about a Court of Appeals decision dealing with whether a CGL policy covered a cyberware attack. That court held that there was no coverage. But the Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer and decided that there are issues of fact that must first be resolved.

Indiana has enacted statutes that deal with premises liability for nonprofit religious organizations. But the statute does not define what the “premises” of such an organization is. Instead, that was the task of the Court in this case.