Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse

Call For A Free Consultation Today | 317-505-1342

  • Home
  • About Our Firm
    • Attorney Profiles
    • Our Firm History
    • Why Choose Us?
    • Articles
    • Blogs
    • Newsletters
    • Verdicts And Settlements
  • Personal Injury
    • Car Accidents
    • Truck Accidents
    • Catastrophic Injuries
    • Dog Bites
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Premises Liability
    • Product Liability
    • Wrongful Death
    • More Practice Areas
  • FAQs
  • Attorney Referrals
  • Communities Served
    • Indianapolis, Indiana
    • Bloomington, Indiana
    • Columbus, Indiana
    • Fort Wayne, Indiana
    • Gary, Indiana
    • More Communities Served
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About Our Firm
    • Attorney Profiles
    • Our Firm History
    • Why Choose Us?
    • Articles
    • Blogs
    • Newsletters
    • Verdicts And Settlements
  • Personal Injury
    • Car Accidents
    • Truck Accidents
    • Catastrophic Injuries
    • Dog Bites
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Premises Liability
    • Product Liability
    • Wrongful Death
    • More Practice Areas
  • FAQs
  • Attorney Referrals
  • Communities Served
    • Indianapolis, Indiana
    • Bloomington, Indiana
    • Columbus, Indiana
    • Fort Wayne, Indiana
    • Gary, Indiana
    • More Communities Served
  • Contact
Email

CALL

Photo of John M. McLaughlin, Tony W. Patterson and Paul S. Kruse

Helping You Put Your Life Back On Track After A Serious Injury

  1. Home
  2.  ► 
  3. Indiana Supreme Court Decisions
  4.  ► 
  5. Indiana Supreme Court Suggests Possible Expansion of Employer Liability for the Actions of Employees

Indiana Supreme Court Suggests Possible Expansion of Employer Liability for the Actions of Employees

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Jan 13, 2016 | Indiana Supreme Court Decisions |

In a decision that was released last month by the Indiana Supreme Court, the dismissal of a negligence lawsuit against a security company that employed a man who shot and paralyzed a woman while on the job was reversed, and the security company may be found liable for the woman’s injuries through a settlement or jury trial. This ruling appears to expand the breadth of claims that Indiana courts will allow to proceed to trial, possibly allowing Indiana personal injury and wrongful death victims to pursue more avenues to obtain compensation for their losses.

Resident Who Had Relationship With Security Officer is Shot After an Argument With Him While on Duty

The appeal in Knighten v. Davis Security Service was filed based on an incident in East Chicago, Indiana, that occurred on August 7, 2010 when a security officer employed by a company that was hired to provide security for the housing complex shot a woman whom he had previously dated after the two had an argument that appeared to be related to personal issues between them. Before the shots were fired, the woman had damaged the entrance gate to the complex.

As a result of the shooting, the woman is now paralyzed from the waist down, and she filed a lawsuit against the man who shot her, the security company that employed him, and the housing authority that contracted with the company to provide security. At the center of the recent ruling was the woman’s claim against the security company that employed the man, and whether the company can be held financially accountable for the man’s conduct.

 

Indiana Law and The Legal Theory of Respondeat Superior

In some cases, an employer can be held accountable for the negligent acts of their employees through the legal theory of respondeat superior, sometimes referred to as vicarious liability. In an Indiana personal injury lawsuit, an employer can be liable for the negligent acts of an employee if the employee was acting “within the scope of their employment.” During the initial phases of this case, the claims against the security company and housing authority were thrown out because the judge found it impossible to dispute that the man was acting outside the scope of his employment when he fired at the woman during the course of their admittedly personal argument.

On appeal to the Indiana high court, it was found that the decision of whether an employee is acting within the scope of their employment is a question that must be decided by the jury if there are any disputed facts that could be decided one way or the other. The Court ruled that since the officer was armed with a firearm at the discretion of the security company, and the victim had damaged the security gate before the shots were fired, the issue of whether the officer was acting within the scope of his employment should be decided by a jury. As a result of the ruling, the victim may recover damages from the company that employed the security officer.

How this Ruling May Affect Other Indiana Negligence Cases

The Court’s ruling that a jury should decide whether the man was acting within the scope of his employment when the shooting occurred could represent a possible shift in Indiana law toward allowing more juries to decide what is within the scope of employment in a respondeat superior claim, as opposed to having judges decide the issue earlier in a case, as has happened more often in the past. This ruling could give Indiana negligence victims a greater opportunity to receive compensation for negligent acts performed on the job, especially when the action was performed by an employee with limited means and no insurance to enable them to pay a possible seven-figure judgment. Indiana accident and injury victims should always consult with a qualified attorney who follows developments in Indiana law to decide if they would like to file a lawsuit for damages.

Have You Been Injured?

If you or a loved one has been injured by the negligent or seemingly intentional acts of an employee while they are on the job, respondeat superior may allow you to sue the employer and the employee at the same time. The dedicated Indiana personal injury and wrongful death attorneys at Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse have years of experience getting fair compensation for our clients, and we know how recent developments in Indiana law can be used to help our clients get the compensation they deserve. At Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse, we represent clients throughout the Midwest in negligence, wrongful death, and personal injury actions. Call us today at 317-505-1342 or contact us online to schedule a free consultation.

Related Posts:

Court Discusses What Constitutes a “Medical Malpractice” Claim, Versus a Claim of Ordinary Negligence, Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog, January 6, 2016

Court Held Patron “Assumed the Risk” When Injured at Haunted Attraction, Indiana Injury Lawyer Blog, December 1, 2015

What should you do after a crash on I-465 or I-70?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 27, 2025 | Car Accidents

You're driving I-465 like you've done a hundred times before — fast, focused and trying to get somewhere. Then it happens. A sudden jolt, a loud impact, maybe the screech of tires or the crunch of metal. Everything feels disoriented for a second, but your mind starts...

The rights and duties of bicycle drivers in Indiana

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 15, 2025 | Bicycle Accidents

Bicycling is a beloved activity for many in Indiana, offering a means of transportation and a way to enjoy the outdoors. Still, sharing the road with motor vehicles can present significant risks. To safeguard cyclists, Indiana has various laws that address bicycle...

Costs of loss: recovering damages in child wrongful death cases

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Apr 28, 2025 | Wrongful Death

You can lose the ones you love for the most mundane reasons. A seemingly innocent meal purchased at a local grocery store can cost you more than you intended to pay. Late last year, grieving mother Shantria Weddle filed a wrongful death lawsuit. Weddle’s 12-year-old...

Modern twists on the age-old problem of distracted driving

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 31, 2025 | Car Accidents

We all know texting while driving is dangerous. But have you looked around your car lately? Modern vehicles come packed with screens, buttons and alerts that can pull your attention from the road just as quickly as a phone. And outside your windows are plenty of...

What are the most common causes of car accidents in Indianapolis?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 21, 2025 | Car Accidents

Several factors consistently contribute to vehicular accidents in the Indianapolis area. Data shows the following are top causes of accidents in the area: Alcohol: Recent research conducted by Indiana University’s Public Policy institute finds that a top cause of...

What are unique factors of commercial truck accidents?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 21, 2025 | Truck Accidents

When driving on Interstate 465, I-70 or I-65 around Indianapolis, you’ve likely felt dwarfed by massive commercial trucks barreling down the highway. The sheer size disparity between your vehicle and a fully loaded semi creates potentially catastrophic consequences in...

Am I liable for a car accident on a slippery road?

On Behalf of Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Mar 20, 2025 | Car Accidents

Heavy rain or snow can create hazardous driving situations. Wet roads can cause cars to slide or skid, making it hard to control your vehicle. Icy patches are even more dangerous, as they can be nearly invisible and cause sudden loss of traction. On snowy or rainy...

When Businesses Have a Duty to Protect Their Customers: The Foreseeable Attack

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Dec 12, 2023 | Premises Liability

On November 29, 2023, the Indiana Court of Appeals published its Opinion in Brummett v. Bailey, 23A-CT-683, slip op. Brummett is the latest case in a string of Indiana Court of Appeals decisions following the Indiana Supreme Court’s Goodwin v. Yeakle’s Sports Bar & Grill, Inc., 62 N.E.3d 384, 389 (Ind. 2016). In these cases, the courts have been grappling…

Thu v. Willis and the Necessity of Expert Medical Testimony

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | Aug 28, 2023 | Car Accidents

On March 13, 2023, in a memorandum decision, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s decision for the plaintiff in a negligence complaint despite the defendant-appellant’s argument that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence that the car accident at issue was the proximate cause of his injuries. In this case, Thu v. Willis,[1] Guy Willis Sr. (“Willis”)…

Erie Insurance Exchange v. Craighead: Protecting the Purpose of Underinsured Motorist Coverage

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP | May 22, 2023 | Car Accidents, Insurance, Underinsured Motorist ("UIM") Claims

In a case determined in September 2022, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided an important and common issue for injury victims when dealing with their own insurance in its opinion in Erie Insurance Exchange v. Craighead. Many drivers who are injured as a result of an underinsured motorist turn to their own underinsured motorist coverage and medical payments coverage to…

« Older Entries

Recent Posts

  • What should you do after a crash on I-465 or I-70?
  • The rights and duties of bicycle drivers in Indiana
  • Costs of loss: recovering damages in child wrongful death cases
  • Modern twists on the age-old problem of distracted driving
  • What are the most common causes of car accidents in Indianapolis?

Archives

Categories

RSS Feed

Subscribe To This Blog’s Feed

Contact Us Today

Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse

Phone
317-505-1342

  • Follow

Indianapolis Law Office

251 North Illinois Street
Suite 1800
Indianapolis, IN 46204

Lebanon Law Office

225 West Main Street
PO Box 668
Lebanon, IN 46052
Chicago Law Office

One East Wacker Drive
Suite 2600
Chicago, IL 60601

Review The Firm

© 2025 Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP • All Rights Reserved

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw