Berryhill sued Parkview, alleging that the security guards‟ actions constituted false imprisonment. The trial court concluded that Parkview was immune from liability based on a statute that covers persons who assist in detentions. Berryhill now appeals, claiming that the immunity statute does not apply because he was not detained for purposes of the statute until after his wife filed the application for detention. We disagree with Berryhill and affirm the trial court‟s judgment.
Facts and Procedural History
The facts most favorable to the trial court‟s judgment are that on August 25, 2007, Berryhill became agitated and argued with his wife, Kay. They fought over the TV remote control, and Berryhill grabbed Kay‟s arm and pushed her onto the bed. At approximately 11:20 a.m., Kay called 911. According to the 911 incident report, Kay requested an ambulance for Berryhill “due to his head hurting from a prior stroke and brain surgery” and informed the operator that he “also battered her during the incident.” Plaintiff‟s Ex. 1. Emergency workers and police officers arrived at the Berryhills‟ home. The emergency workers tried to persuade Berryhill to go to the emergency room, but he declined. The police officers asked Kay if she wanted to have Berryhill arrested, and she declined. The emergency workers and police officers then left the Berryhills‟ home.
Judge(s): Terry A. Crone
Jurisdiction: Indiana Court of Appeals
Related Categories: Torts
|Trial Court Judge(s)|
|Court of Appeals Judge(s)|
|Appellant Lawyer(s)||Appellant Law Firm(s)|
|David Kruse||Kruse & Kruse PC|
|Appellee Lawyer(s)||Appellee Law Firm(s)|
|Mark Baeverstad||Rothberg Logan & Warsco LLP|
|Andrew Palmison||Rothberg Logan & Warsco LLP|