Indiana
How Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co. applies in Indiana: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Civil Procedure.
Indiana follows the federal standard regarding civil procedure, particularly the burdens of proof in summary judgment. The precedent from Adickes reinforces that plaintiffs must provide sufficient evidence to support their claims to survive a motion for summary judgment.
In Indiana, the standard for summary judgment mandates that if the moving party demonstrates the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, the burden shifts to the non-moving party to present evidence creating a triable issue.
The Indiana Supreme Court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment as there were unresolved material facts that warranted a trial.
The court reiterated that it is the non-moving party's duty to present evidence countering a properly supported motion for summary judgment.
The court emphasized the obligation of the party opposing summary judgment to demonstrate the existence of genuine issues of material fact.
Indiana adheres closely to the federal summary judgment standard outlined in Rule 56, where the burden of proof lies with the party opposing the motion once the moving party establishes the lack of genuine issues of material fact. However, the Indiana courts may interpret procedural rules with slight variations compared to federal courts.
Adickes and its principles regarding summary judgment are relevant for the Indiana Bar Exam, particularly concerning questions on civil procedure and the responsibilities of parties in summary judgment motions.