From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pannell v. Leonard

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Jul 6, 2020
148 N.E.3d 359 (Ind. App. 2020)

Opinion

Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-PL-938

07-06-2020

David PANNELL, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. Bessie E. LEONARD, Appellee-Defendant.

Appellant Pro Se: David Pannell, Pendleton, Indiana Attorneys for Appellee: Curtis T. Hill, Jr., Attorney General of Indiana, Natalie F. Weiss, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana


Appellant Pro Se: David Pannell, Pendleton, Indiana

Attorneys for Appellee: Curtis T. Hill, Jr., Attorney General of Indiana, Natalie F. Weiss, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana

OPINION ON REHEARING

Darden, Senior Judge.

[1] David Pannell has petitioned for rehearing of our memorandum decision dated March 3, 2020. We grant rehearing for the limited purpose of correcting a factual error in the decision but otherwise affirm.

Pannell captions his petition as a "Suggestion for Petition for Rehearing Enbanc." The Court of Appeals of Indiana does not review decisions en banc.
--------

[2] In our original decision, we stated incorrectly that on March 6, 2018, the federal district court had dismissed Pannell's complaint "with prejudice." Pannell v. Leonard , Case No. 19A-PL-938, 2020 WL 1023454, *3 (Ind. Ct. App. March 3, 2020). Whereas, the federal district court had dismissed his complaint "without prejudice," and remanded back to the trial court for consideration of any state-law claims by Pannell. Id. [3] Aside from the factual error, we affirm our original memorandum decision in all aspects.

Riley, J., and Tavitas, J., concur.


Summaries of

Pannell v. Leonard

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Jul 6, 2020
148 N.E.3d 359 (Ind. App. 2020)
Case details for

Pannell v. Leonard

Case Details

Full title:David Pannell, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. Bessie E. Leonard…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Date published: Jul 6, 2020

Citations

148 N.E.3d 359 (Ind. App. 2020)